[0:05] Reach in the 6:00. I call the City Council meeting to order. Please rise for a moment of silence. Councilor White, please lead us in the pledge. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[0:36] In accordance with the Massachusetts General Law, chapter 38, section 20, notice is hereby given to those present that these proceedings are being audio and video recorded. Your voice is being recorded and your picture is being taken. Roll call, madam clerk. President Persip here. Councilor Lampiasi. Here. Councilor Kavey here. Councilor Wrinn here. Councilor Costa. Sorry. Councilor Cunningham.

[1:00] Councilor White here. Councilor Moody here. Councilor Conant here. Councilor Amuso here. Councilor Warren here. And for the record, Councilor Cunningham is joining us. And also Councilor Costa will not be in attendance tonight. Item number two, madam clerk. The sound, the alarm. Save a Life award presented from the American Red cross to the Pittsfield Fire Department.

[1:30] Representing this. You want to come up to the microphone? Good evening everyone. Members of the city council? Uh Chief Sammons. Mayor Marchetti, uh, members of the Pittsfield Fire Department and the Pittsfield community.

[1:55] My name is Nia, and I have the pleasure of serving as the executive director for the Central Western chapter of the American Red cross. So, on behalf of the American Red Cross of Massachusetts and the central Western Mass chapter, it is an honor to be here tonight to recognize the Pittsfield Fire Department and specifically, Inspectors Matt and Dave, who partner alongside us installing smoke alarms.

[2:17] Thank you for your partnership with our Home Fire campaign and most importantly, for helping save lives right here in your city of Pittsfield through the Home Fire Campaign. The Red cross works alongside fire departments and volunteers to install free smoke alarms and help families become better prepared for home fires.

[2:41] Tonight we are so proud to recognize two documented lives saved cases in on May 25th, 2025. One life was saved and on July 1st, 2025, three lives were saved. For lives in this community where smoke alarms installed through the Home Fire campaign helped provide the warning.

[3:12] The warning needed to escape. We also have one of our Red cross volunteers, Sky Goodrich. He is here with us. Tonight who actually helped install smoke alarms. He helps install smoke alarms in this very community. So thank you for all of our volunteers at the Red cross for Sky for doing this work to the Pittsfield Fire Department.

[3:39] Thank you for your partnership and your commitment not only to responding to emergencies, but to preventing tragedy before it happens. On behalf of the American Red Cross of Massachusetts, and specifically the Central Western Chapter, it is my privilege.

[4:03] It is our privilege at the Red cross to recognize the Pittsfield Fire Department for its role in the Home Fire campaign, and for helping save four lives in the city of Pittsfield. Congratulations to all of you and thank you again so much for all that you do. Did you say something? No. I want to. Uh, thank you very much. Item number three, madam clerk. Point of order. I have a name.

[5:01] I excuse me, but could I have the full names of the officers that are getting the awards? If you want to come up and just give your names. Thank you. That was going to be my question. So we all want to thank you, but I didn’t hear last name. So. Matthew Kiernan. Thank you. And William Prendergast.

[5:22] Thank you I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor. Next next portion of the meeting is open mic. First up is John Powers. Please give your name and Mr.. And keep it to three minutes or less. John powers 26 Rhode Island avenue Pittsfield, mass.

[5:55] I’m here tonight not to criticize anybody, but a plan for Pittsfield. I owe a lot to Pittsfield. Pittsfield don’t owe me nothing. I want a plan that Washington, DC has. Their plan. The white House and the new ballroom underneath. They have a fallout shelter. Well, the Pentagon and the Capitol are going to Camp David. They’re all set.

[6:20] Well, what’s our plan? I asked for the governor to come here. Lieutenant governor. The senator, our rep to help us out of all Massachusetts in case something happens. And also the weapons to Pittsfield Police Department has weapons. The state police were part of the registry, had weapons. The sheriff’s department has weapons. But what about the Pittsfield Fire Department? They’re the first on the scene.

[6:50] There are civil defense. I think they should be armed with the ambulance and the Red cross in case something happens here. Because in Iran, what happened is, well, the a nuclear weapon. Well, Russia’s already making them a nuclear weapon. So we we got to do something.

[7:13] We got to get out of Iran, but also if something happens, the Pittsfield airport, if something happens to them, we got Camp and Ota and camp Pontoosuc are named after Indians. We drain them and fill them in so the planes can last.

[7:36] And also at the cell towers go down, we have walkie talkies and bullhorns, and if something happens like a BMC with the hospital, we go to Pittsfield High tonic, PCC for backup for hospitals. And we need everybody in this together. We’re all in this together. If something happens, they say, well, look at Colonel Custer. He didn’t wait for help and look what happened at Pearl Harbor. They were warned with the planes on what happened.

[8:01] So I’m not saying I want to be a hero or this or that, but with the help of the governor in that and the mayor and the council president, vice president and councilors, help me out. That’s all I say. God bless Massachusetts and God bless the United States of America. Thank you. Next up is Charles Jenkins.

[8:27] Good evening. Honorable board. Council members. Uh, and Mayor, um, I’m here to speak to, um, the battery energy storage. You just gave us your town, your your salary. I’m the record I did in North Andover, Massachusetts. Thank you. I said my name, right? Yep. Okay.

[8:55] Um, so I represent blue sky utility, and we, uh, we build battery energy storage systems throughout the country and and beyond. Um, I guess my, I’m going to use my time here just to give everybody sort of a a quick synopsis of what we’re talking about with the battery energy storage systems, because they are fairly new, and not a lot of people know

[9:16] all that much about them and what their functions are. So at this point in time, and what we’re proposing is, a battery energy storage system that stabilizes the grid, the the regional grids we use.

[9:38] So for instance, um, when we’re in a heat wave and everybody goes home, turns on their air conditioning and so forth, that strains the system can lead to brownouts and blackouts. So traditionally, what would happen is they would kick on the peaker plants, which are usually which are fossil fuel generators. And of course, those are bad for the environment and very costly.

[10:04] So as opposed to that, that traditional manner during the day, I mean, there’s a lot of, um, renewable energies that are produced here in Massachusetts and throughout the region. Wind, hydro, solar, um, and traditionally, what happens is because of the way they produce, they might not be used during the course of the day when they’re actually producing.

[10:27] So traditionally, what would happen then is if there was an overage and people weren’t using it, it would be grounded, essentially thrown away, wasted. So this new model takes whatever overages there are, storage it in the battery, and then it’s pulled out when it’s needed to keep the grid stabilized.

[10:46] Thereby what it does is it reduces the peaker the peak demand charges for the ratepayer. So you don’t have to pay for that extremely high, uh, peaker plant cost. You’re pulling out of this battery that’s just sitting there waiting to be used. Um, I’m running short on time. It can also stabilize the local grid. Now, say we have a regional power outage.

[11:12] It keeps the fire department up and going, its police department up and going, the local hospitals up and going. The city hall up and going. So we can then respond to the emergency. Emergency in hand. Um, can’t really go any further into much more detail.

[11:34] I just wanted to sort of give a grand overview, brief overview, and thank you very much. Thank you. Next up, Rebecca Thompson. I’m Rebecca Thompson and I live in Ward seven in Pittsfield. Um, good evening and thank you for listening to me. I’m here to speak to the mission and importance of the work of the Dei office. Regardless of what the city chooses to call it.

[12:02] I would specifically like to address Mr. Cunningham’s assertion, quoted in The Eagle, that though he supports the mission, $200,000 is too much, with no measurable metrics. His claim about dollar spent and lack of metrics reflects his own lack of historical understanding.

[12:23] He is not to blame for that, because literally for centuries we have swept the history of the United States as an economic powerhouse under the rug, because we refuse to acknowledge that the country’s success was fueled by stolen land and stolen labor.

[12:39] It is that history that most of us do not know, that has brought us to the place where the work of Dei is essential to our survival as a democracy. The history that we learn is grounded in a false narrative that white Europeans were superior to the native people they deemed savages, and the African people they deemed animals in order to enslave.

[12:59] This false narrative has persisted through 250 years of enslavement, and another 150 years of Black Codes and Jim Crow right up to the present. Newly arrived immigrants from Ireland, Italy and Central Europe were also deemed as less than, not fully white until they too accepted dark skin as a sign of inferiority and began upholding the supremacy of whiteness.

[13:21] For centuries, those in power have used skin power color to sow divisiveness and hatred in order to limit access to wealth and power and health care. Public education, housing, and thriving communities.

[13:41] As soon as disfavored people make gains, as in the ten years of reconstruction following the War of the rebellion and during the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s, and 60s, politicians find new ways to fuel white rage to limit access to the ballot, to gut labor unions, to create policies that deny access to employment, pose unfair tax burdens on the poor and middle class, and to criminalize poverty and the mental health and addiction that often accompanies it.

[14:03] This pattern is repeating again following the presidency of Barack Obama. This is why we need to do deep work. At its heart, it is about learning and acknowledging the history that it has been denied to all of us.

[14:21] It is naive to think that over 400 years of embedded inequity can be erased in a few years, and that spending $200,000 to do it is too much. The city’s affirmative action ordinance, in place for more than a decade, requires annual reporting of measurable metrics, which the city has consistently ignored. Mr. Obama is currently working to catch up that, reporting additional metrics are certainly needed to fully measure, making progress in improving equity in our city.

[14:46] Such assessment takes expertise and time. It cannot be effectively done by an office of one. So if you support the mission, you also need to support funding the mission to the level that makes it possible to do an effective job. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Camara Talavera. Kamar. Taliaferro. Pittsfield, Massachusetts, fourth ward.

[15:21] I’m here tonight to speak on the petitions from Councilmembers Cunningham and Moody, respectively. The machinery that’s currently being mobilized to deport and detain people in this country before it was known in our current moment as Ice, was known as mass incarceration. And it had a different target. Black and brown and poor white families.

[15:41] And it happened at a different level. The state and local level. Last week, the conversation about item 18, which was the DOJ, OGP drone Grant revolt primarily around keeping all of our neighbors safe, protecting the right of privacy of all of the Pittsfield people of Pittsfield.

[16:01] And I want to thank the nine councilors who voted to not accept that grant. You guys get it. You’re committed to safety and justice for everyone. But simply saying no to drones is a small first step. A small and a first step.

[16:22] Very late in our last evening together, much, much later on than the jingoistic sales pitches on the effectiveness and use of the drones, the council learned that the Pittsfield Police Department was unaware of local ordinances that y’all passed about that exact technology. They wanted you to accept money for. Now, I’m sure to some of you, that was a surprise.

[16:39] But in my 33 years of living in Pittsfield, the surprise, if there was any, was the willingness to admit in public that the police department, our police department, isn’t following local laws. That’s usually usually a conversation that happens on Wellington Ave or King Street or John Street or Francis Ave, or The View.

[17:01] Very rarely in City Hall because just like redlining, just like urban renewal, mass incarceration swept through the United States and right on up into Pittsfield, where much like redlining and urban renewal, for the most part, we quietly ignore it.

[17:17] Did you know, according to an employee at the Berkshire County House of Corrections, 30 to 40% of the population in the jail is black, 30 to 40% of anything in Berkshire County is being black. As a warning sign. So I’m here tonight to insist on the necessity of civilian oversight of the police department, something we don’t have.

[17:34] You may remember, because the former Civilian Oversight Review Board was ethical, stood on their values and voted to disband. Well, actually, they all just resigned because they weren’t allowed to provide a function in the wake of the police shooting and killing one of our neighbors. So the only civilian oversight we have are you here.

[17:52] It’s really, really important that you do your jobs as thoroughly as you possibly can so that public safety includes everybody from Leona Drive to Atlantic Ave. I also came with some questions. I’m not going to get through all of them, and that’s just to show like three minutes, two hours.

[18:13] On a random Tuesday isn’t enough time to ensure that everybody in the city feels safe. So, um, the most important one, I think, is have there been any cases in which drone footage that was in drone deployed by PPD, the footage was used in a case that’s been dismissed, where the accused was found not guilty, or a pretrial plea deal was agreed

[18:31] to, or in which the accused was held without bail or could not pay the amount bail was set out. If that data isn’t being tracked, whatever words that may be said about disagreeing with mass incarceration are moot. You don’t have the data to understand how the decisions you make and your police department makes are impacting.

[18:48] Thank you. Grayson. Thank you. That wraps that portion of the meeting. Item number four, please. Approval of the September 8th, 2026 minutes. Councilor White motion to approve on the motion to approve. Is there any debate or discussion? Hearing none or seeing that? All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. Aye.

[19:09] Anyone opposed? That’s unanimous madam clerk. Item number five. A communication from Mayor Marchetti appointing Jenny Bell to the Human Service Advisory Councilor. Councilor White motion to approve. On the motion to approve. Is there any debate or discussion? Hearing none are seeing. On all those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. I believe Jenny is here. Thank you. Jenny. Item number six.

[19:36] I’m sorry. A communication for Mayor Marchetti appointing Amalia Banse to the Affordable Housing trust. Councilor White. Motion to approve. On the motion to approve. Is there any debate or discussion? Hearing none are seeing none. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. Aye. Anyone opposed? That’s unanimous. Item number seven, please, madam clerk.

[19:58] Communication for mayor Marchetti reappointing Floriana Fitzgerald to the Community Development Board. Councilor White. Motion to approve. On the motion to approve. Is there any debate or discussion? Hearing none are seeing none. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. Aye. Anyone opposed? That’s unanimous. I’d like to thank everybody for willing to serve. Item number eight.

[20:20] A communication for Mayor Marchetti and an order transferring and appropriating the amount of $200,000 from overlay surplus to fund the ongoing rehabilitation work at Springfield House. Springside Park. Sorry. Councilor White. Motion to approve. On the motion to approve. Is there any debate or discussion? Councilor Warren. Uh, yes.

[20:41] Uh, I think this item right here, um, answers the question. I didn’t get a chance to ask at the last meeting because of all the discussion we had on a couple of other items, so I overlooked it. Um, we I noticed in our last meeting that 250,000 was placed in, uh, overlay surplus.

[21:03] And so last time we used, I think 15,000 for that. Uh, program. Now we’re using 2000 200,000 here. So one question is, uh, what’s to the director? Uh, what’s the other 35,000 being used for? Going to be used for? So I.

[21:31] Or do we have a plan for that 35,000? Obviously it’s a specific number we put in that, uh, overlay surplus. At the moment. There is no plan for that 35,000. Um, the 250,000 that was voted by the assessors into the overlay surplus was an amount that they felt comfortable in doing, given the, you know, given the overlay and the need to have, excuse me, reserves in there, uh, to fund and provide, you

[21:52] know, abatements and exemptions. Uh, okay. Um, how much did we have in there previously? Do you know. In the overlay itself. The overlay surplus area. Oh, we had zero. So basically we just put this in. There was nothing. There was there was no residual balance in the overlay surplus.

[22:09] And, um, okay. Uh, or I had one other question for you. Um. And you’re lucky you’re going to dodge it. Uh, so, uh, no more questions. Thank you. Um. Uh, obviously, I’m the councillor for the neighborhood of Springside Park, and, uh, there’s a lot to be done at the spring size house.

[22:36] We put 500,000 a couple of years ago there. Still, we knew there was still more work to be done. This 200,000 is going to be well worth it. Uh, so there’s. And even with that, there’s going to be more work to be done. But there is a problem that’s happened at Springside.

[22:52] And I wanted to ask, and probably you’re the only one who can answer. No, no, this is not financial per se. Uh, the chair to the mayor, my understanding is because I go up there all the time. I’m a matter of fact, I was there this weekend for cleaning with Councilor White.

[23:10] Um, the Springside house has had the bottom windows all broken, so my understanding was there was a recent vandalism issue. Uh, so some of this money is going to deal with that, I hope. Correct. Um, no.

[23:34] This money is to work on the structure of the building we are currently awaiting a I’m going to use the word trial, but it’s not a trial. Um, we are before juvenile court looking for, um, restitution to the from the family with the. That caused the issues. Okay, so. And so that was going to be my follow up. We, uh, and I suspect that it was young people, juveniles. Um, so it’s one individual or. I believe.

[23:56] I believe there were two. From the same family. I, I don’t know that for sure. Uh, and I had heard from somebody that we. The case was already resolved and we received nothing out of that. Are we looking? I’m not sure that we’re going to be able to get.

[24:13] I know that they have been in contact with the treasurer, and I don’t think it’s been resolved. Uh, counselor, there’s a hearing on Monday the 28th regarding this matter. And and it’ll deal with either some type of restitution or some type of community service to pay. The committee. That is my understanding.

[24:34] I have been I will be attending the hearing. I’ve been ordered by the court to be at the hearing, as has, uh, Director Filippo. Okay, okay. Thank you. You’re welcome.

[24:54] And then the last thing I’d like to say is, um, since the council and the last couple of weeks seems to be in our, quote, transparency, error, quote. Um, error. Um, where we’re looking closely at all of these things, one of the things I’d like to say about the, uh, surplus overlay is I know we have a, policy about how the mayor would notify the assessors.

[25:17] So you sent them a notice asking for them to put this money into surplus or the director. Pardon? Okay. Uh. Under again, under the under the law counselors, there’s two ways that the assessors can address overly surplus surplus.

[25:38] One is, as you stated correctly, uh, a letter from the mayor, but they, as a board, can act on their own based on their judgment as to whether or not they can take some of the resources. You know, some of the overlay and declare it surplus and make it available for appropriation.

[25:57] My only my only question is, uh, or my only thought suggestion at some point, either they need to or we need to put a requirement that we get notified so that we know, you know, because we wouldn’t have known about this other than we’re now using it and stuff. And this meeting took place a couple of months ago. The yes, the meeting took place in August. And as per open meeting law, it is a public posted meeting with an agenda. And I’m not I wasn’t saying anybody was trying to.

[26:14] Hide it. Oh no no no I’m not, I’m not I’m not saying that it’s. You are. If we tried to keep track as you’re going to find as maybe we hear later about how an ordinance we passed, uh, lots of departments didn’t seem to follow it.

[26:27] And there’s reasons there’s no blame to to be shed on that. So I, I’m just saying that that’s something I think we should be notified of. That’s a fair point, councilor. Um, but anyways, I, I asked my colleagues to support this. This is a very good cause. Thank you. Councillor Cunningham. Through the chair. Probably to Director Kerwood.

[26:45] Sorry. Yeah, I think he started this, um, process before I was here. So two quick questions. What’s your timeline for completion on this and what’s your estimated cost to completion? Oh, two very good questions, councillor. Um, and the answer to both of those is, uh, at the moment unknown.

[27:06] Um, what I can tell you is that the Springside House project has been kind of in, done in spurts. Um, we did the facade, we did the outside, we did the roof. Um, and now we’re focusing on the the interior of the structure.

[27:26] Um, and for a while, there was a question as to what ultimately was going to be the reuse plan. Well, we settled on a reuse plan in the American speak to that, but just briefly, it will be used for city offices. Um, and at some point in the future.

[27:43] So we’re in the process of working with the architect that we have to actually design it for that function. Um, that work is ongoing. We hope to have at the end of October a better understanding of the total project cost based on the conceptual layout and design that we have at the moment. And at some point again in the future, is Councilor Warren alluded to.

[28:01] Uh, we will be back in front of this body seeking additional resources to actually do the full the full buildout. Okay. Right now it’s just a. Shell, not a huge fan of that answer. Um, so you don’t know how much money and you don’t know a timeline, but October, you’ll have more details.

[28:18] Again at the end of October, where the the architect has been instructed to, you know, what you know is that is that they will come back to us with a plan and a bill that, you know, build out scenario, cost estimate based on the conceptual layout and design that we’ve put together. Then you’ll be back asking for.

[28:35] At some point. That is correct. And the idea is to do it in one. Fell swoop, so to speak, rather than kind of the way that it has been done at $500,000 a year, $500,000, there isn’t really getting us moving the ball to where we want to.

[28:52] So again, the idea is to get a full understanding or, you know, an idea of a better idea of the full build out costs and then bring that forward. So is the the money we’ve spent in this money rehabilitation. So the building’s usable. And then when you come in October, that will be okay. Let’s use the building build out. Yes.

[29:10] Or will I also be rehabilitation money.. That will be it’ll be a combination of both. I don’t know if you’ve ever had the opportunity to be in the building, but it is, uh, the exterior may look nice. The interior needs some work.

[29:26] Um, so this money right now is part of the ongoing work to shore up the building. Structurally. One of the issues is that we, uh, due to the the reuse plan, we have to put an elevator in the building, um, so that requires engineering and structure. Uh, as you well know.

[29:42] Um, so, you know, and so that’s part of the work that’s going on right now. And again, that’s the basis for which we will then bring forward, uh, a full kind of build out scenario, uh, and a cost estimate associated with that. Right.

[29:58] Councilor Warren said that this would be a good, good use of the money. I presume that this will give us office space to get out of leased space. Correct. Again, the Americans speak to that. But ultimately, as the mayor stated before, his ultimate goal is to get us out of lease space and get us back into facilities that we actually own and manage.

[30:14] Right. And I think at least one of those leases is 150 a year. So I’d probably pay off in the end. So okay. Yeah, I’ll support this. I yield the floor. Is there any other debate or discussion? Hearing none. Before I get my steps in again. We good hearing none are seeing none.

[30:30] All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. Aye. Anyone opposed? That’s unanimous madam clerk number nine, please. Communication for Mayor Marchetti on an order authorizing the city of Pittsfield to enter into a memorandum of understanding with Berkshire Medical Center for the project at North Street, at the North Street roundabout. Councilor White motion to approve.

[30:51] On the motion to approve. Is there any debate or discussion? Hearing none are seeing none. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. Aye. Anyone opposed? That’s unanimous. Item number ten, please. A public hearing from a report from the Ordinance and Rules Committee on a petition for the proposed battery storage.

[31:13] Battery energy storage system, zoning amendment recommending to approve a five zero. Okay. Uh, we’ll open up the public hearing. So who’s going to present this? Kevin. Good evening. Councilors. Uh, this is a amendment to our battery energy storage systems. Um, ordinance. Our current ordinance was very reactive to battery energy storage systems. They’re a very new technology.

[31:46] In our community. Wanted to ensure that they’re responsibly sited or approved to operate in our community. Um, but the ordinance was extremely restrictive and has essentially created a kind of soft moratorium on the use in the city.

[32:05] Um, and so last year, we were looking to amend the ordinance to make it a little bit less restrictive. Uh, and the state actually released regulations telling how municipalities can regulate these uses, what is reasonable and what is unreasonable. They’ve also, you know, made them akin to, uh, chapter 48, section three use.

[32:27] So something similar to how religion or education is treated in state law. So an exempt use and some municipalities cannot unreasonably regulate a use that is under that section. Um, so what we’ve done here is we’ve, you know, flown pretty close to what the state’s model regulations are that they’ve released to us and, uh, tried to keep our regulations as reasonable as possible.

[32:49] And where we have deviated from the state, usually in terms of siting and zoning districts, that the use will be allowed to be to exist in. Um, we’ve the Community Development Board has really created some intent and some description as to why they have deviated from the state law.

[33:07] Um, so that’s essentially the gist of it. I can take questions. Um. Uh, we’ll do questions after we close the public hearing part. We’ll open it up now to anybody in the audience that would like to speak on the public hearing for a second time.

[33:25] Is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak for or against? And for a third and final time, is there anybody that would like to speak for or against? All right. We’ll close the public hearing. Is there any debate or discussion from the council or any questions. Except the report? Oh.

[33:46] So before we do that, because we kind of out of order, we’ll Councilor White can I have a motion to accept the report? Motion to accept the report. On the motion to accept the report. Is there any debate or discussion on the report? Hearing none are seeing none. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner I. Motion to ordain.

[34:01] On the motion to ordain. Is there any debate or discussion? Councilor Cunningham. So I watched the owner meeting for this, and something that came to mind when we were doing the, um, I lost it right now, but the ranges for what is a small, what is medium, what is

[34:17] large, the small is inclusive of, I think, 250 kilowatt hours all the way down to zero. Um, and the definition of, of a best would, I think, make any lithium device then under 250 kilowatt hours a small best, which would require either temporary approval.

[34:38] I think there’s a clause for that with the commissioner, um, or require permitting, which, um, of course, this is an extreme case, but I wonder, um, you know, at what point do we start to look at a temporary battery or a small battery and start to look at it as a, you know, substitute for a generator as batteries will get better and

[34:58] better, they’re going to get smaller and higher capacity. So if we bring in a vendor on North Street for First Fridays and they don’t use the normal generator, they use a battery.

[35:16] You know, what kilowatt hour do we want to say is safe that they can just bring it? Um, I think it you know, it’s one of those things where it probably just fly under. Um, but I think there should be a lower bound to what a small Bess is, or a change to the definition for what a Bess is in general, to not include these kind of generator, portable generator use cases.

[35:35] Um, because now you have battery packs that can power laptops. Um, it’s not long until you can have them. That power, I don’t know, power tools. I know there are some that better, you know, power power tools, fire departments have them a lot of times.

[35:51] Um, what are their kilowatt hours? You know, does that make sense? What’s the what’s the lower line where we’re going to say it doesn’t need to be subject to this ordinance. Do we want to throw a number on there and we can deal with it later? I’m going to ask the city planner if you want. To go through the chair of the city planner.

[36:08] Was that considered? Yeah, so we’ve already addressed that. That’s in the ordinance. Portable batteries are exempt from the provisions. Small portable batteries are exempt from the provisions.

[36:26] And there is a clause within the medium scale where the building inspector can approve temporary medium scale batteries, which would be ten megawatt hours, up to ten megawatt hours through the temporary use section zoning. Section 4.3 ten one five. Megawatt. Hour. Ten megawatt hour. Yes ten hour ten. Megawatt one megawatt hour. That’s one megawatt in megawatt megawatts and megawatt hour. Two different measurements. Right? So mega. We once capacity our ordinance. Deal okay. So our ordinance deals with 250 kilowatt hours.

[36:54] Yeah. For small scale 0 to 250 kilowatt hours. And then. This is 250 kilowatt hours to ten megawatt hours. And then large scale is ten megawatt hour to 100 megawatt hour. And the state considers those small. And then anything over 100 megawatt hours is the sole jurisdiction of the state for permitting.

[37:14] So in my case, I think still like still stands. What’s the is there a control for the lower bound? You said there’s a portable I. Can you cite the. Portable or let me see if I can find. This. Because I just control left portable. I couldn’t find it.

[37:48] Well, I find the other one. Uh, the medium scale is C15. Temporary, small or medium scale batteries may be approved by the building commissioner in accordance with the provisions found in section 4.316 of the Zoning Ordinance. Um, see here. It’s in here somewhere.

[38:32] But if it I can’t find it, on in my head right now. But I swear it is in there. Um. Would you say the words portable? Portable? Yeah. I couldn’t find the word portable when I searched it. Or temporary? Uh, if it’s not in there, I’m certainly open to amending it to allow them, uh, to be. I just did a quick Google, and I’m seeing, like, um.

[39:02] I think. We cut kilowatt hours or I guess a one kilowatt hour, 1000 watt hour. So I moved to amend to to add a lower restriction. And I’ll read you the exact language to, um, small. So it would read, let me find that section again. So I moved to amend section one, Battery Energy storage systems.

[39:30] Definitions of small scale um, to read small scale, small scale. Best shall have an aggregate capacity less than or equal to 250 kilowatt hours. And if room consists of only a single energy storage system, I moved to amend.

[39:55] Um shall have an aggregate capacity greater than, um, let’s say two kilowatt hour, two kilowatt hours, and less than or equal to 250 kilowatt hours. That should cover these small portable ones. And any lithium device. So then it doesn’t have to be subject to this. And this is solely to amend to for portable. Specifically.

[40:16] This is small small scale in general because I don’t know if the best definition handles anything smaller than that. Um, smaller than. Smaller than. What’s the logic of two kilowatt hours? Because I googled portable electronic generators that can power hand tools, and I was seeing like one kilowatt hour or two kilowatt hour. So something that is consumer that isn’t doesn’t need to be subject to this further.

[40:37] I guess another question would be like electronic bike batteries. I don’t know what their capacity is, but I’d assume they get to this point. I mean, I would suggest that the amendment be that portable, small scale battery energy storage systems be exempt from the provisions of this section.

[40:59] Is there is there not a portable clause already? Because we I think that would probably be better. That’s what I would suggest. In general, requirements. Uh, for uh, 7.857 C and it would be 17. Uh, what section is this? This is uh, it would be section three C general requirements. Um, and then I would add 16 and I would say all uh.

[41:28] section three portable. Yeah. Or sorry of the amendment. So it’s section 7.857 C 3.857. C three. Light lighting shall be downcast. Requirements. General. Yep. Section. Is it section five on. Oh all right. So it’s section five in the amendment which is 7.857. And then it would be c c.

[42:03] And then we would just add 17 to it. So would be and we would just say. Am I looking at the same version. Oh portable 17. So it would exempt portable. From we would we would add 17 and we would say all portable battery energy storage, all small scale portable battery energy storage systems are exempt from the provisions of

[42:23] this section. That would be what my proposed language would be. Okay, I moved to amend that section. Section five. Section 7.857. Section C to add item or clause or whatever. Subsection 17 to say all portable battery storage systems shall be exempt from this ordinance. On the amendment. Through the chair to.. Before we.

[43:00] Excuse me, if I may, I would try to limit that to small scale because there is a specific provision in there for a medium in case someone brings in a tractor trailer with a large battery on it to power a festival. So there is a provision for medium.

[43:16] So I would respectfully request that you limit that amendment to small scale. Okay. So the language should read all small scale portable battery electronics. Storage systems shall be exempt from this ordinance. Do you have that. Clerk one more time, please. Council all portable small scale battery energy storage systems shall be exempt from this ordinance.

[43:45] So that would be anything less than 250 kilowatt hours. Okay. We’re good. They’re all right on the amendment. Is there any debate discussion Councilor Moody. So if I may through you to. Uh Councilor Cunningham. Sorry, are you removing the two kilowatt hour section. Of the. Yeah. I don’t think we put that question.

[44:10] Um, and I did handle this kind of messy with saying a few different ones. That two kilowatt hour wouldn’t be included in this at all. It would be anything portable that would meet the small scale. Is exempt. Is exempt. So less than 250 okay.

[44:27] Because yeah, because we’re talking about it’s not just our phones. And um, maybe a generator. We’re also talking about every company in Pittsfield that has a battery backup for their network solution. So, um, I think it’s important that we not put that low limit on it. So, uh, I’m fine with exempting under 250 kilowatt hours. I done. I yield the floor.

[44:51] All right. Is there any other debate or discussion on the amendment here? Guntur Singh, on all those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner I anyone opposed that amendment is passed and Councilor Cunningham you still have the floor.

[45:09] So my my other thing I want to ask about and I have lost the section for that as well. But um, when these come so there are small is by right correct. Small systems are by right. Uh through the chair to I guess the planner if he’s still here. Kevin. Kevin. So small systems are still are by right allowed.

[45:35] Uh, you would need a building permit, but essentially, you know, the building permit would need to comply with the requirements of small scale battery energy storage systems. But you wouldn’t need any special zoning approval for that use. Okay. And medium is also a part. Of that special permit. Special permit. So who’s the. And then I assume large would be the same. Yes. Right.

[45:52] And then anything over a hundred is the state. Yes. Right. Okay. So who would be the approval of that special permit. Zoning board of appeals. So essentially they would since it’s a 7.8 use, they would need site plan review and a special permit.

[46:08] So they would need to go to the Community Development Board for site plan review and zoning Board of Appeals for a special permit. And we designed it that way so that both technical boards get an opportunity to take a look at it and see if it meets the requirements. Um, but that’s how it would work. Okay.

[46:30] I think in previous versions of, um, this battery ordinance, the council was the approving authority. That’s incorrect. Is that incorrect? Okay. I want to pose the question with this new technology and seeing how controversial this can be, if the council should be involved in the approval processes. Um, I want to throw that. I’m not going to suggest an amendment.

[46:46] I want to throw that idea out to the council. If you guys want to consider that. Do we want to be in the loop for this? Um, do we want 100 kilowatt or 100 megawatt hour? Um, 10th a gigawatt starting to push some of the bigger systems

[47:06] to just be able to go through our technical boards? Do we want to make sure that residents have a direct interface to this kind of decision? Do we want to have an opinion on where it ends up going? Um, I feel like with this kind of technology and something that’s new and

[47:19] something that can be this impactful, I feel like it should be a similar discussion. When we look at data centers or these other large buildings that can impact the landscapes, should the council be on the loop of this decision making? Um, I think it should.

[47:35] Um, I want to hear from my colleagues if you guys would support it, and we can craft an amendment. I yield the floor. Is there any other debate or discussion? Hearing or seeing none all those in favor, as amended? No, we have the. Did we do the report? Sorry, I’m off track. So this is it was a motion to ordain roll call. Madam clerk.

[48:03] Councilor White. Yes. Councilor Moody. Yes. Councillor. Kona. Yes. Councilor Amuso. Yes. Councilor Warren. Yes. Councilor Lampiasi. Yes. Councilor Kavey. Yes. Councilor Wrinn. Yes. Councilor Cunningham. Yes. President. Persip. Yes. That’s unanimous madam clerk. Item number 11.

[48:39] A report from the Ordnance and Rules Committee on a proposal to reclassify a parcel of land located at one Frederico Drive, recommending to approve as a public hearing. Yep. So we will open up the public hearing. Mr. Scalise, are you going to start us off all right? If you want to just give a brief overview of the project. Uh, good evening. For your record, my name is Jim Scalise.

[48:56] I’m a civil engineer at SK design Group. I’m here on behalf of Federico Realty Corp and the Berkshire Mountain Collision Center. Uh, the property is located at one Federico Drive. It’s approximately a 2.4 acre property. It’s the former Fedex facility. So it’s a fully developed building. It’s about 14,850ft.

[49:21] The building has access roadways, two curb cuts, sewer and water service. It’s a fully developed light industrial property. The proposal is is to extend, uh, neighboring zones. So there’s a neighboring a light industrial zone that abuts the property. There’s also general industrial and limited industrial that surround this particular parcel.

[49:42] And in this case, what we’re requesting is that the light industrial zone, which is the telephone company building, uh, be extended to cover this property. And the reason for that is, is that the potential buyer and developer of of renovations at the facility, the the Berkshire Mountain Collision Center, wishes to operate a collision center or an auto body shop under the zoning ordinance at this location.

[50:01] Now, auto body shops are the reason that they’re under the light. Industrial versus limited is historically, those uses have been more intense. Um, that has changed. Uh, this type of use is now, um, entirely indoors in the building. The proposal is to create a workflow inside the building with stations for automobile repairs.

[50:21] Uh, there is some vehicle storage outside, but this site actually has a low portion of the parking lot to the rear. And we’re proposing privacy fencing to shield and screen that area. So we believe that this lot is entirely surrounded by a current industrial uses. My my office being one of them.

[50:39] And that the building as it sits can be adaptively reused for this purpose. We’ve gone through a full site plan review with the Community Development Board. I can answer questions, but we’ve looked at things like traffic, sewer, water, stormwater, and all of those things are less impactful. Or in stormwater case, no change.

[50:57] Um, as it relates to ordinance and rules, we also had a unanimous vote from them. In that case, we reviewed what potential other uses could be done under the light industrial, because the zone change goes with the land.

[51:12] So you’re kind of approving not only this particular use, but that the land could be used for light industrial uses rather than limited in the long term. Uh, response at that time was that, you know, this is an expensive undertaking. It’s a it’s a long term investment.

[51:28] Um, we have a local, uh, operator who wants to use this facility long term, so we don’t expect any change. And then further, the uses that it changes to are also not really there. They’re low intensity uses. If you look at the description in the zoning ordinance for light industrial, it’s it’s uses that have light traffic, low noise impacts.

[51:46] So it’s it’s a again it’s still a light industrial use rather than general industrial. So we believe this is in keeping with the neighborhood. And request your consent to move this forward. If you have any questions I can go to much more detail.

[52:01] We got to finish the public hearing and then we’ll open it up for questions. If you just have a seat. Thank you. Is there anybody in the audience to speak for or against for a second time? Is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak for or against, and for a third and final time, is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak for or

[52:17] against hearing? So we will close the public hearing, councilor. White motion to accept the report. On the motion to accept the report, is there any debate or discussion? All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner I. Anyone opposed? That’s unanimous. Councilor White motion to ordain. On the motion to ordain.

[52:41] Is there any debate or discussion? Councilor. Comment. Um, that I’m in full support of this? I’m a neighbor in that area and we need more body shops in this community. And I think we’re on the right track with this. We got jobs coming in. We got more businesses coming in. So I’m all for it.

[52:56] And I encourage my colleagues to do the same. I yield. Is there any other debate? Councilor Amuso. Thank you. Um, through you to Mr. Scalise. So just to be clear, so right now, Fedex was in the building. The building is vacant. The building is vacant. That’s correct. Um, how many new jobs will this bring in the.

[53:16] Next year? Uh, my filing shows 10 to 12 jobs. And those are new, new jobs. So it’s not a, you know, an existing business right now. So. That’s right. I yield the floor. Is there any other debate or discussion? Hearing none or seeing none. Roll call. Oh, sorry. Councilor Cunningham.

[53:33] Thank you for doing business in Pittsfield. Neal. The floor. And anybody else. All right. Hearing or seeing none Councilor White. Yes. Councilor Moody. Yes. Councilor Conant. Yes. Councilor Amuso. Yes. Councilor Warren. Yes. Councilor Lampiasi. Yes. Councilor Kavey. Yes. Councilor Cunningham. No. You forgot. Wrinn. I’m sorry. Councilor Wrinn I. Had to jump around. Costa.

[53:59] Councilor Wrinn. Yes. Councilor Cunningham. Yes. President. Persip. Yes. Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you. Appreciate it. Item number 12. A report from the Ordinance of Rules Committee on a communication for Mayor Marchetti on an ordinance amending City Code chapter two to rename the Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, recommending to approve, as amended, 5 to 0.

[54:31] Councilor White motion to accept the report. On the motion to accept the report, is there any debate or discussion? Hearing none or seeing none. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. Aye. Anyone opposed? That is unanimous. Councilor White on the ordinance. Motion to ordain, as amended. Motion to ordain, as amended.

[54:49] Is there any debate or discussion? Hearing. None. Oh. Councilor Cunningham. Uh, I, I’m a little confused by some of the versions in here. I see the red line version, and then I see, um, the non red line version that I see has the changes. I presume that’s the final document we’re talking about right now. Correct.

[55:11] Okay. All right. So. I want to kick this off with a with a bigger question. Um, what. And this is I guess through the chair to the mayor. Good evening. Thank you. In your administration and in your city offices.

[55:53] Um, what problem is this intended to solve? Um, I think it’s intended to solve two. And if you want me to go on record to say that it takes us out of the federal guidance of Dei, you got it, councilor. Um, I don’t want the city jeopardized for funding.

[56:09] I don’t want to change what we’ve done. And as I’ve stated here a number of times, I also believe that poverty is the root of all of our evils in the city and needs to be addressed in some way, shape or form. And this new revised office will allow us that opportunity. Okay. But you don’t want the city jeopardized for funding.

[56:33] And so is this intended to get out of the federal guidelines to try to ease it? Is it is there to do what we have always done and add the ability to work on poverty issues, to improve the quality of life for people of Pittsfield. So my understanding is this isn’t how we’ve always done it.

[56:52] This was created four years ago, if I’m not mistaken, by Mayor Tyer. Correct? Correct. Okay, so this is solving an issue you feel. Yes. Do you have data to support that? That is an issue. That poverty is an issue. That hiring practices and atmosphere is an issue in your offices.

[57:18] So we have an affirmative action plan that, um, is used occasionally. And it, um, was used often when we had an active affirmative action committee with the city of Pittsfield. Um, that lasted a few years.

[57:46] The creation of the Dei office was supposed to, um, be carried further, and I can’t speak to why not? But there was supposed to be an advisory committee, for Dei that was going to do the work and and move things forward. And no appointments were made to the Human Rights Commission or to the Affirmative Action Commission. So right now, the city, including I and U.S.

[58:05] councilors, are in violation of the affirmative action policy because there has not been a report provided to the City Council since 2020. Whose job was it to provide the report? Well, it was supposed to come from personnel of both the school department and the city. I wouldn’t say then that the council is in violation.

[58:27] I would say there is one seat, I believe, appointed by the president, um, or per se. It’s actually ex-officio. So, councillor, I say all of. Us and your job is to appoint the rest of the seats, if I’m not mistaken, in the standing ordinance.

[58:46] I’m changing that to merge the Human Rights Commission and affirmative Action Committee together. And that’s why it’s happening. So my question is, and this was my same question with the the drone question, why have those appointments not been made since you’ve been elected? Because since I’ve been elected, I had directed the Dei office to create a joint committee, and it’s been being worked on.

[59:05] It’s been being worked on for two years. It has. Been and is. there’s been, yes. What is there any progress? Um, it’s before you tonight as a new, improved office, a new improved ordinance and a direction to create one committee that has both on there.

[59:24] And I will say to you, councillor, um, with all due respect, and it goes to every member of the city council, we all Took the same oath. So if we’re missing something as a city, whether it be my responsibility or yours, we’re all guilty because we all took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the

[59:37] United States and the rules and ordinance of the city of Pittsfield. So it’s nice that you can point fingers, but when something doesn’t happen, um, it’s all of us. When the auditor wasn’t appointed in a timely fashion.

[59:53] Um, Councilor Warren I joked about it was my job to remind you to do your job because I’m the paid professional. That’s a full time job. Um, that’s not my job. You’re the checks and balances. And you should also be opposing. It’s not your job to do what? To tell you to do your job. To tell us to hold you accountable to the ordinances that we pass to.

[1:00:09] To pass and to hire an auditor in a timely fashion. I agree that the auditor situation wasn’t handled correctly, but I also was not on the council, and so I’m not going to take blame for something that I could not solve at the time, but I’m doing everything I can to solve what I can.

[1:00:24] Now I am too. So my point. That’s why my ordinance is in front of you. In two years. This this since you’ve been elected, this ordinance has been on the books, as has the drone ordinance.

[1:00:37] And I presume it was not acted on because it was not read. It read so through the chair to, um, I guess any member of this new was a commission committee. There isn’t a commission yet because until. You the one that you read, the joint Commission that you reformed. I haven’t.

[1:00:52] Again, I need you to approve my ordinance before I can put that joint committee forward. That’s part of the ordinance, councilor. So you said you’ve been working on this for the last two years. What are those? Who is on those two commissions or committees? It was myself, Mr. Robertson, attorney. Grierson, attorney Pagnotta and attorney Grand champ.

[1:01:09] When’s the last time they’ve met? When’s the last time we met? About the ordinance? Just before it was any time before the budget. Once this started to become a discussion. It’s been in discussion for two years now. Two years.

[1:01:31] So was there any time before when was the last meeting before the budget that these commissions met? It’s not a commission. There is no commission. So in current ordinance, there are bodies that are meant to be advisory to this department. Yep. When did they meet last? Before the budget season. 2020 2021? You can ask the chair of the Affirmative Action Council. 4 or 5.

[1:01:48] Years ago, when there wasn’t a quorum. And so a new mechanism. You appoint the quorum. And so my point is, I don’t think this ordinance has been on the books, and I don’t think you acted on it for two years, and they never met.

[1:02:06] And then you saw the hot water that happened during the budget over this because it was not being met and it wasn’t being accountable. And I actually laid off during the budget and then found the the police department wasn’t being accountable. So now I’m going to hold you accountable again to the ordinances. You can hold me accountable. This wasn’t being this. This wasn’t being handled.

[1:02:21] I will share with you all the emails regarding this happening through the chair before the budget. To Director Abbas Khan. From what I’ve heard, there is a new commission. Uh, yes. That is what is being proposed. Proposed in this ordinance. Prior to this? Yes.

[1:02:44] There were these other commissions where supposedly there was appointments and supposedly they met in August and unknown there through the chair to Director Abbas on before the budget season. There isn’t really a record of when they met last. We think 2020, 2021.

[1:03:08] Um, um, and so from when that became apparent that the ordinance was not being followed by the administration, when did those fixes start to be implemented? To start following the ordinance? Um, so if you are so what you’re saying, so the committee. And the commission have not met since 2021. Um, and so there is that there is no meeting. So I came in to fix that.

[1:03:32] So between the time of 2021 to now was the direction of me to, um, combine the affirmative action and the Human Rights Commission. And in that time, in doing so, it’s taken this amount of time because the ordinance that was being worked on has seen many iterations. When were you hired.

[1:03:55] In 2022? 22? Yes. So you said you were brought in to fix that? Yes. To work on, on, um, to effectively combine those two together so that it has more teeth to them. And now since 2022, you’ve been tasked with fixing that. Um, and now before us is a fix. That’s what this ordinance is. Yes. Four years later. Yes.

[1:04:21] Okay, so I think there’s a there’s a decent bit of questions for you, director Abbas, on in this amendment to 154.41. Two. 154.41. In accordance with all of the charter articles and sections that detail mayor appointment, powers and confirmation, chief Equity Officer.

[1:05:09] Upon adoption of this article, the Chief Diversity Officer being you shall be the Chief Equity Officer and the budget and personnel of that department will be renamed as well. Transferred specifically so. What did the Department of Dei do in the last four years? What was its mission? The mission was to develop the Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. Um, me coming in, there was no department at all.

[1:05:40] So, um, what happened in those amount of years? Uh, was one hiring of a, um, a coordinator that took a few months to do that. Um, also developing systems within the department when it came to developing the budget.

[1:06:05] Um, also creating and crafting a curriculum for workshops and trainings for our departments. It was also getting to know all of the departments, all our department heads, um, and how many, uh, over 30 some departments going in and doing an informal Dei assessment of our departments, having them get to know me, um, and then building that relationship with them as well, uh, crafting the, uh, ambassador program as well.

[1:06:29] Um, in doing that, um, recruiting training, um, as well, uh, with that and then, um, also getting involved in the community, um, letting the community know that there’s department now exists within that time when more and more of our community realize that this department, um, existed, got asked to come in

[1:06:55] and help develop Dei committees with them. So that’s taking all a lot of time as well. Um, along with supporting the schools as well. Um, you know, the first superintendent that was there and then now, um, the now, um, Doctor Phillips that is in place.

[1:07:16] So there are things that would come to my department, uh, from the schools, whether it was families, that are experiencing racism, um, you know, anything based discrimination based on gender or anything that would come to my department because there was no place for them to go within the schools. So help supporting that. Um, the schools as well.

[1:07:38] So all this, um, happening in those amount of years that you were talking about while also doing an assessment of what is happening in the department around language, our language access plan, digital equity. Um, doing that work. And one’s assessing and realizing the work that has been coming out of the department.

[1:07:59] Um, realizing putting a name to the work that is happening will suit the department well. So the mission for the last four years was to develop the department, develop systems, meet the directors, develop curriculum and build awareness. For four years. And then you you described that there were products starting to come out of the department as it exists today. What are those products.

[1:08:28] ? Are you talking about the like programming? You said that you were starting to produce products and you wanted to put a name. To that. Oh, so, so like the programming that that happened in the department. Um, again, language access, digital equity, um, EEO, um, investigations. And along with our HR department, um, it’s consistent within my role.

[1:08:52] So those are the things that would come out and then along with again creating education, awareness, building inclusive environments and supporting our department heads on the work that they’re doing in their departments as well. So providing these services, what are these services intended to solve? Well.

[1:09:18] Creating what existing problem is there in the city? Uh, um, well, without saying too much, um, if you are, if if we’re talking about employee relations, we are the charge of the department and the city, all of our departments create a welcoming, a welcoming, equitable environment within their given spaces. Um, throughout.

[1:09:50] Um, and this will be included in the um, in the affirmative action report that since my time here, um, I’ve been within creating those spaces, there have been informal, um, complaints that have come to me since, um, around discrimination. Um, that consisted of race, gender, disability. Um, so, so let’s say that again. Informal complaints. Yes. So informal, um, versus the formal complaints.

[1:10:15] There is a process that exists where if an employee feels that they’ve faced discrimination, they could go online and fill out a form. That form comes to my department and then myself and our HR director will actively investigate.

[1:10:34] Uh, informal complaint is if an employee comes and meets with me, um, they don’t want to put in a complaint. They would just want to talk through and have an informal mediation. Uh, we will go in that direction. Um, so in that time, um, there has no have been no formal complaints. All the informal complaints that have come to my department has been handled through informal mediation.

[1:10:54] Um, we also get we may get some, um, community members that come in that may be in a crisis. And I get called down to come and handle some, some issues.

[1:11:16] So, um, with that being said, is to help train our employees again in creating a welcoming space, um, around, um, de-escalation, how to deal with people who are different from you, different identities. Um, sometimes there are words that are used that are not appropriate for the workplace. Um, and um, there are certain departments that need an extra push, um, in order to help with the behavior that happens in their departments. Okay.

[1:11:37] Do you have numbers for how many complaints you receive? Uh, since that time, the informal complaints have been, um, 17. 17 informal complaints over four years. Yeah. Okay. That would be four. A year, 4 to 5 year, roughly. Okay. One every couple few months, three months, I believe. Um, okay.

[1:12:02] And these are the and those are the ones that go forward with us, um, with myself, um, HR director doing some investigation. So you’re implying there’s more than 17 reported? That they could possibly they can come in and talk with me. Yes. Um, but the ones that are informal, that have led into more of, uh. Formal process. Like, not a formal process, but a mediation were, um, documented at 17.

[1:12:32] So there are 17 documented cases of pursuing some sort of action. Action? Yes. So you also describe there are certain departments who struggle with problems in this space. Yep.

[1:13:02] Do you have any data around workplace environment or workplace sentiment or anything from those departments to support problems, or is it solely based off these qualitative complaints? It would be based off of these complaints. Okay. So have you ever gathered any. So and I think we talked about this when we met you and your department survey or I guess is intended to solve a very qualitative problem. And so it a qualitative problem and a big enough organization.

[1:13:28] I believe we have like over a thousand employees between us and the school to narrow it down to just I think the city side like 500, give or take 5615 60. So that’s a pretty large organization with a number of departments that can be pretty large sometimes too.

[1:13:48] So you’re trying to solve a qualitative problem of hundreds and hundreds of people, and you receive, you know, a handful of complaints a year in formal complaints. I presume you didn’t mention any number of formal complaints. Uh, there there was no formal complaint. No formal complaints. Okay. So I think that because I kind of made I understand where you’re, where you’re going with this question.

[1:14:09] So. Yeah. And then big enough organization 500 something employees, zero formal complaints, a handful of informal complaints yearly that are bound to happen statistically with personalities and all sorts of reasons that people could disagree or misinterpret communications, especially in the digital age. You’re tasked with solving a qualitative problem for 600 people.

[1:14:34] Um, and how do you solve that? Because we have a very similar problem as as councillors, we’re trying to solve problems for 40,000 people. And it’s very easy to get swept into because they’re qualitative problems.

[1:14:51] A lot of times it’s very easy to get swept into the vibe, because when you have a qualitative problem, you’re going to listen to the negative bias towards it, right? You’re going to inherently listen to the things that are wrong with the qualitative problem. You’re going to hear the informal complaints. You’re not going to hear the positives. That’s just human nature.

[1:15:13] So since you’re tasked with a wholly qualitative problem, how do you then prove that you are solving or helping the problem? When we met, my point was you put quantitative data to it, and a lot of large organizations do this already. It’s called the Q12.

[1:15:35] I think for fortune 500 companies, it’s an HR survey of 12 standardized questions they put out to large organizations that help gauge workplace environment, workplace atmosphere, sentiments, and how well people feel appreciated, I think, is the specific tasking of it. And I mentioned this in our meeting. Do you have, I guess, first off, and this will get to the actual language of the ordinance in a second.

[1:15:57] Do you have any plans of doing that? Uh, yes. Well, actually, when we met, we talked through because you did have that question. Um, and a year and a half, two years ago, I believe it was, um, we conducted a climate survey, uh, that went out to our city employees. I sent you those results. Um.

[1:16:17] That climate survey is produced by what department? It was produced by my department. The climate survey? Yes. So the climate survey. Uh. Why wasn’t the HR department survey? Nope. It was. It was through my department. It was through my department. With the support of HR. Like, we collaborated.

[1:16:39] Um, so that went out to our city employees, um, and then to further enter your your question, um, I think that what is being what can prove that the. The positive the positive outcomes of of the department is our department heads, our employees coming to the department and utilizing it in situations when discrimination happens.

[1:17:08] So if the if employees are comfortable coming to me sitting down and talking, um, to get an understanding of what if discrimination happened to them, I will take that. If they want to go through an informal process rather than going through a formal process or even bring it to the state level process, I think that’s a win for us. Um, and that’s what has been happening.

[1:17:30] I’ve had a number of employees even before making decisions on, uh, reprimands to make sure that it’s they aren’t missing anything. They aren’t discriminating. They don’t feel like they have misinterpreted language.

[1:17:53] Uh, so I think that’s that’s when I think that, um, shows that they feel comfortable coming to my department or in seeking my expertise or, um, and, and me building that trust with our, um, employees. Okay. So is, uh, Michael Taylor here? Director Taylor, threw the chair to Director Taylor. No. Tell me about this climate survey process that was done in May and June of 2025.

[1:18:26] That climate survey as Director Obasanjo stated, was created by him and distributed by his department. So that question should be answered by Michael. Okay, through the chair to Director Roberson. Why is there no mention of any diversity, equity or inclusion metrics in this survey you created? There is mention of diversity, equity and inclusion in that survey. There should be a question.

[1:18:48] In there that states, um, in each question, it’s the last question. Do you feel, um, that you um, it was an awareness question around belonging in equity. There was also a question around more of wanting to see more. Um, diversity trainings. Um, dei trainings. So, um, I haven’t looked at that survey in a little bit, but.

[1:19:13] Perhaps, perhaps I don’t have the questions, but I’m looking at it right now. Um, I see one mention at the last mention. It’s second to last in responses are mentions. Um, in it there’s a single point that includes a sense of inclusion, a single word.

[1:19:34] Employees want a stronger sense of inclusion and respect. Train. All voices are heard, lumped in with recognition and appreciation programs. They celebrate achievements, um, and comments of higher workload. I don’t see any other quantitative results referring to that problem.

[1:20:01] So my point is, and what I’m going to get to with, you know, I don’t want to keep us all night with these questions, but what I’m going to get to is there is a section in here, right. Um. 21541. That transfers you to head this new department.

[1:20:34] And my question to the council is, should we have a confirmation for this kind of role, assuming that the mission’s changing, the department is changing the structure, and it’s spanning three different articles of our code. That’s the first question I want to pose. I’m not going to move it just yet. Um. And then the next thing I want to get to is the section on training.

[1:21:04] There is a section requiring mandatory training for the entire city employees, I believe currently that it’s a biannual basis, and section 2154.54 is the mandatory training. So let me. Pull that out. Section. What’s that? Counselor. 2-154.4 weight 0.5. Parentheses four. I’ll get to the numbering of this later. So the portion that. I’m referring to is one. Remembering of this. Regardless, I have it printed out here.

[1:21:52] The verbiage reads completion of one train per year shall be mandatory for all city employees. Uh, and my question to my colleagues is, do we want our employees spending and their time doing this, watching the owner meeting? Um, no one hammered down exactly how long that training would be.

[1:22:10] But I did hear discussions of it being an entire day. And so off of that, I did these calculations, assuming 500 employees, 560, but I was conservative with 500 employees. That could be 500 days of road repair, 500 days. Well, I guess that could be 500 days of road repair, city cleanup, safety improvements, and a number of things.

[1:22:37] This isn’t even including the time spent in schools. That’d be 4000 hours a year at $25 an hour, that would be about $100,000 a year. Not assuming even the benefit.

[1:22:58] Other, um, you know, more general accounts that support employees, but just assuming $25 an hour for these rates would be $100,000 a year. That would be like having two people in the city sit through training all day, every day for their job year round, and then what of that time spent, I guess through the chair to Director Olson, what is the quantifiable effect are we looking for with spending those hours?

[1:23:19] On the quantifiable effect, you mean the effect of our employees going through that training? Yes. What they would be going through? Yes. Because I struggled to find with you what the problem is.

[1:23:38] I struggled to find how we can quantify the problem, to know that the money we’re spending on your department is actually helping people. Um, and then now we’re going to spend not just the money on your department, but also time from every single department that supports every single service in the city on this mission.

[1:24:01] What is the problem? What is the quantifiable effect that we’re tracking? And then how do we expect this training to impact that metric? Well, the training will consist of one. How to interact and create a, um, how to interact with employees who are different from you. Yes, that is a problem. Um, with, um, within some of our employees, uh, I get it all the time to come in and again, mediating conversations. 17 reports, all.

[1:24:24] The parts of again, one would be too many of of someone going back and forth with each other. Um, again, to your point, time that could be spent working rather than going back and forth trying to debate or, um, conflict. Right.

[1:24:50] So, in these trainings, they will be, um, going through some foundational, um, awareness of, um, terminology around diversity, equity and inclusion identity. Um, they will also be some de-escalation information. I think. The director is being asked to defend a policy that he didn’t write into the ordinance. That’s a good question. I’ll get. I’ll get. To that.

[1:25:08] So I don’t I don’t I don’t think that’s a fair line of questioning. I think we could spend our time more usefully. Okay. So my point is, and I, I’ve made a lot of my point, but we’re spending this time, we’re spending this money on this department. Um, we yes. One report is one too many.

[1:25:30] I agree, but we, as the council, are also the keepers of our residents money. And that is getting tighter and tighter. And so my question is, at what point do we need to accept there will be reports and we need to deal with the cost because yes, we could in theory spend money on this until we

[1:25:46] get down to zero reports a year. How much money would that cost? How much of people’s time in training would that be? You know, I don’t know. I would expect it’s exponential as you get closer to zero reports. Right. These kind of things are going to happen.

[1:25:59] And so my question is, is this a big enough problem to justify spending. And this will lead me to my last set of questions before I start making motions through the chair to the mayor. Mayor Marchetti. This last budget season was very tight. This next budget season I expect, will be tighter.

[1:26:20] I think we all agree on that. Do you commit to funding this department in the next city budget? I’m not committing to anything until I know what my financial resources look like.

[1:26:45] Um, I think we’ve had this conversation, um, when and if we are faced with having to make those decisions, there will be communication, um, with myself and members of the community, communication with all of you councilors, as I have done in the budget process to determine the priorities. And we’ll put something forward at that point in time. So codifying this department in city code will require us to go back and do this whole process in six months, probably sooner.

[1:27:03] When we go into the budget. And so if we codify this, the answer of, well, we’ll see becomes harder to actually manage without moving the ball really fast when we’re already looking at this. Now.

[1:27:25] I’m not sure I share that sentiment, because if we had done nothing, that department is there, and it’s the same position. I’m not changing anything. I’m changing a name. I’m changing a process. Um, you asked me why not appointees? Well, from my first day as mayor, there was a directive to go and, um, create one commission I can share with you hundreds of emails back and forth from Michael Bazelon to,

[1:27:51] um, then attorney Pagnotta, then Attorney Grierson, now attorney grand champ. Um, it has seen a number of pieces, quite frankly, counselor, I think this is a question for all of us. What are your values and what do you believe in? If you don’t believe in this, then you vote no.

[1:28:12] If you believe in this, we move this forward. We create, um, a human rights commission, and we begin to allow that commission to do work. I think it’s as simple as that. Um, we can wordsmith the words.

[1:28:30] Um, I think the the mandatory training, if my memory serves me correctly, and it was a while ago, was a requirement of the city council, not a requirement of the administration. I think it was an amendment at honor. Um, I’m open to engage in a conversation to create the best community that we can. Um, without compromising the values that I believe in. So when it comes to committing to funding it. I’m not going to go into anything.

[1:28:52] You don’t know. I don’t know, okay. I think it’s an interesting ask because when budget cuts come, we’re going to be met with the same or worse deficit we had this last year. We cut a school, we cut a number of departments.

[1:29:08] You skimmed over the top, you cut positions that weren’t filled. But to a lot of people, that will be what the city kind of had for slack that we could cut without too many hard feelings in these coming years.

[1:29:22] I think you need to consider if we’re going to fund this, and if we’re going to put this into code, we’re going to have to deal with it in code. When the budget comes up in, you know, six months, the budget will be back up as a discussion. We’ll need to start dealing with this before then.

[1:29:35] Um, if we already cut the positions people occupy, then what are the positions that we’re going to cut or the people, I guess, that we’re going to cut. In those currently occupied positions to help pay for this. This is $200,000, 190 something in salaries that a lot of times could translate to three positions in other departments.

[1:29:55] Another question is what school line items would be bearing cuts? To meet this, we had to cut supplies. We have buildings that we need to sustain. $200,000 a year goes a long way, especially when you start to use it for debt service. Um. So I would.

[1:30:10] Then when it comes to roads or sidewalks, I believe we just passed a measure approving a number of roads for a few million dollars, even $200,000 a road can translate to three to for smaller streets, even seven. Counts. I’m really in a little bit because this is you’re kind of going off topic, just you’re on the edge there.

[1:30:25] I don’t like doing this, but you gotta kind of stay on top. I think the first thing we need to question is as a new department with a new mission, do we want to have consideration for a new director? And so I’m going to move that. We strike the language in, pull it up.

[1:30:44] Section 2154.41. Uh, the last sentence detailing the transition of budget and title. I can read that if you’d like. Yeah, please. 2154.41 the the sentence in that first section would be upon adoption of this article, the Chief diversity officer shall be the chief equity officer.

[1:31:18] And the budget and personnel of the Office of Diversity, equity, inclusion shall be deemed assigned and transferred to the Office of Equity, Access and Opportunity. I move the strike that sentence. Point of information. Can you tell me the page number so I can? Yeah, I know. You can’t see. That 107. It’ll be at the bottom of 107. Uh. That one I was having. Right up.

[1:31:43] There and type it in. It’s right at the bottom. Okay. Oh, he’s not on the red line. That’s probably it. Okay. My fault? No. Not either. Okay. There we go. Okay. Uh. Are you done, counselor? With the amendment? Uh, I was gonna throw some debate in once. Uh, we opened. It.

[1:32:06] Well, I’m going to open it up right now on that amendment to cut that. I have some debate. So, like I said, new mission, new tasking, new department, new name. I think we should consider a new director.

[1:32:21] I have a number of questions I would like to ask of the presumed director, whoever it may be. Um, I don’t want to have to ask them tonight because I don’t feel like we should go that late. But I think it is a question we all need to consider during budget season.

[1:32:40] Um, and as our job as council, it is our job to hold the administration accountable. Like Mayor Marchetti just said, I think we need to ask questions of his leadership. We need to ask questions of who he is entailing with leadership. And during budget discussions, we struggled to get answers that we could feel confident in.

[1:32:58] I think we need to consider that, and I think we need to ensure that that kind of culture doesn’t proliferate. Um, I’ve seen it with the police, I’ve seen it with this department. I want to make sure that people are accountable.

[1:33:18] I want to make sure that directors know the code and answers answer to us properly. That, and, um, the four years of unquantifiable evidence to solving a problem. Um, think deserves another look, because I want this mission to actually be helped. I want us to actually get somewhere with this.

[1:33:42] Um, and if we’re not quantifying it and we don’t have leadership that is able to show to us that the money we’re using from our residents pockets is actually solving the problem, we say it is. I think that kind of leadership needs to be reviewed.

[1:34:00] And I’ve I’ve felt this across a number of different departments, but this is the opportunity for this one. And so I think this amendment should pass because it doesn’t necessarily fire Director Roberson. I’m not saying that I wouldn’t necessarily support his candidacy, but I think it needs to be looked at again. And I would rather us not do that tonight. I yield the floor. Councilor Kavey through the chair to either.

[1:34:19] I guess, attorney Grand champ or the director of HR. Or maybe both of you should come up. Um, so I have here that mean motion. And so if I call the department head, they’ll normally pick up, get right back to me. We work together, but I’m not their direct supervisor. Correct? Correct.

[1:34:42] And I also am not able to hire or fire city personnel. Being a city councilor. You approve the appointments, but you don’t hire them personally, right? So we normally don’t deal directly with personnel.

[1:35:03] Um, and one thing that I was thinking about through this discussion is we’re looking at an ordinance and, um, the conversation went a lot towards the individual and the position. This is an ordinance for a department. Yes. There could be a different individual in that position in the future. But again, it’s not our role to directly hire fire. Um, yes, we approve the appointments, but we don’t. correct reprimand.

[1:35:24] We don’t. It’s that would be up to the director of HR and the mayor in this case. Correct? Correct. All right. Thank you. I yield the floor. Councilor Amuso. Um, I don’t necessarily agree with a lot of the discussion tonight.

[1:35:44] And, um, Councilor Cunningham, when you say we you should say I because sometimes I may not be on board and other people might not be on board. And I know there are times sometimes it is we.

[1:36:06] But, um, you know, as a member of owner and obviously when this came to before us, um, I’ve spent a lot of time on this and I know other people have and we aren’t here looking at an individual. We’re looking at a change for the department. So, um, I am making a motion to move the question. So this would be you’re making a motion to move the amendment because that’s what we’re on right now. Yes. Okay.

[1:36:31] On the motion to move the question, which is the amendment, all those in favor of Signify in the usual manner. Hi. Anyone opposed? Opposed. So we’re back on the amendment. You still have the floor, councilor. Um, I yield the floor. Councillor white. Yes. Thank you. Um. As it’s been said, we’re discussing an ordinance here.

[1:36:57] We’re not discussing personnel also for this same process, we changed the title of the personnel director to human resources. Director. Under this same, um, process, without the human resources officer having to come back to us. So I think using this process, that’s not even a question. And, um, so I will not be supporting this amendment.

[1:37:22] On the amendment. Is there any more debate or discussion? Councilor Warren. Uh, yes. Uh, just regarding this, there’s a there are a lot of problems in here, and I’ll address those at another point.

[1:37:46] But, uh, for our new for some new councilors and for some old councilors, this is analogous to when we change charters in the charter. There’s a provision that all the office holders of the previous are made the same officers under the new charter, until such time as there are new appointments. So this is not any different than that. We’re not dealing with personnel the same person. We’re just switching them over.

[1:38:12] I think that’s the least of our problems. I will not be supporting this amendment. On the amendment. Is there any other debate or discussion? Councilor Lampiasi thank. You. Um, what Councilor Warren said. Absolutely. And in addition to that, if we were not to appoint Mr. Eberson, that would create yet another disruption in the department.

[1:38:35] Part of the concern that I think my colleague is highlighting is there’s been a disruption in work or in perceived productivity, whether or not that is accurate. Um. Mr. Mayor. Remind me you may not have actually, this might be a Michael Taylor question. Um, our our staffing in the solicitor’s office. Was it for disruptions that we’ve had? So we had Pagnotta and we went to Grierson.

[1:39:03] We went from attorney Pagnotta to Attorney Grierson, back to Attorney Pagnotta, now to attorney Grand Champ. And during that time, we have reduced the size of the City solicitor’s office right. Um, yes, it was a two person office. It went to a three person office. It’s now back to a two person office. Okay.

[1:39:25] Um, I’m concerned. Uh, that. I’ll correct that. The reality is, is that that office has a lot of work to do. We have a lot of employees. We have a lot of legal things that that office is dealing with on a daily, weekly, monthly basis.

[1:39:46] And for each of those different iterations of a city solicitor to come in, they’ve had to catch up on work. And I think that that is a legitimate, legitimate thing for us to consider when we’re talking about the creation of an ordinance that needs to be written and collaborated with the team. If we were to not appoint Mr.

[1:40:05] Roberson and wait for another appointment and possibly reject the timeline here and even the trajectory of what that looks like, it doesn’t make sense in terms of how you run an organization. Um, so for that, I can’t support the amendment. I yield the floor. Thank you. Is there any other debate or discussion? Anybody that hasn’t gone once? Councilor Amuso.

[1:40:24] I just want to clarify because I made a mistake. So I did not want to vote yes on the amendment. I was trying to move this. Whole question. Yeah. That’s why I had.

[1:40:36] You have I want I don’t know if I have to move the question again to vote no or can I through you to the city clerk. Or what. Reference it in the minutes. Yeah. I don’t think. I’ll reference. It was to move the question. Yeah. We that wasn’t on the amendment. Yeah. We haven’t voted on the amendment yet. Okay. Thank you.

[1:40:51] Is that it. That’s it. So anybody else hasn’t gone once Councilor Cunningham. So to Councilor Warren’s point, that’s a charter mechanism for switching charters. I don’t think it’s comparable with city code and ordinance amendments. And for the council to adopt this measure, it’s effectively holding a confirmation.

[1:41:11] My point is, I don’t want to spend this floor session that I have right now asking the questions I feel I need to ask to support this sort of clause. I’d rather handle that through the Charter’s mechanisms than to forfeit it to this ordinance. So that’s a separate piece to Councilor Lampiasi point with disruptions.

[1:41:33] So when it comes to organizations, organizational leadership, would you rather absorb a few month work impact, possibly even a year work impact in order to avoid the long term year over year over year leadership shortcomings that we’ve I feel we’ve seen with not having quantifiable evidence for these quantifiable problems. I feel.

[1:41:56] Further, councilor, I think we’re going we’re we’re on the line again of kind of keeping with what this is. This is not to infer a like it’s not about staff. It’s not about staff. So I want to make sure we’re talking about what’s. It’s a. Debate change. We should we just shift it over or should we do an A? I understand it’s. In the appointment.

[1:42:13] Would councilor it’s my turn for a second. You’re on the edge of kind of going off topic, so I want you to reel it back in a little bit. And we’re talking about the ordinance. So that’s all I feel okay I’m the guy in the seat. That’s how it goes quick.

[1:42:27] My point is I don’t feel that we’ve articulated a clear and urgent problem further that we could even quantify to say we shouldn’t or do a confirmation because we’re worried about efficiency losses.

[1:42:46] What is the clear and urgent problem? I spent a while trying to figure out what is that actually causing, and the numbers that we can prove. There’s a clear narrative problem. I couldn’t figure that out. My point is, those efficiency losses are not that great a loss compared to what we stand to lose by not doing a confirmation in a selection. That’s my point. That’s why I feel this amendment should pass.

[1:43:03] That’s how it’s coherent to this discussion. Anyone else? Any Councilor Warren? Uh, I’ll be quick, uh, to my councilor, to my right of me, uh, I’ve had communications with newer councilors before. I think some newer councilors are a little too rigid on legal language.

[1:43:26] They get too caught on the words rather than the concept. Analogous means. It’s comparable. If you, in a charter, take all the officers that were there before and put them in the same jobs afterwards. I would think that is a bigger thing than keeping one person in. Plus, we need to use a little logic here. If we don’t do anything here, Mr.

[1:43:50] Roberson is still there tomorrow and the next day and then the next day. So I expect him to be there tomorrow with some title. And I’m not worried about that. I want to deal with other issues. I’m voting against this. Is any other. Anybody hasn’t gone twice on the amendment on the amendment. All those in favor, please.

[1:44:11] Signify in the usual manner I. All those opposed. Opposed. That is failed 1 to 9 Councilor Cunningham you still have the floor. I move that we strike the language of the mandatory training section 2154.

[1:44:38] 54 I believe it’s the last sentence that reads completion of one year training per completion of one training per year shall be mandatory for all city employees. I move to amend that. We strike that sentence. Is there any debate or discussion on the amendment? Councilor Moody. I, I was the one that got into trouble during budget season.

[1:45:00] I voted, I made a movement to strike the entire department because I felt like we were spending too much money on it. Um, what? That does not mean is that I feel that we should go without it. Um, it is.

[1:45:28] Uh, quite frankly, it’s offensive to sit and be subjected to a diatribe from a cis, white rich guy in a room full of black gay women, people that are grew up poor, like myself. I grew up in the projects. People that are elderly and have to deal with, uh, not getting jobs because they’re too old to come back into the workforce. Um, it’s, um.

[1:46:00] It’s astounding to me that, um, that that you have taken this much time to tell us. All right, hold on, councilor, Council, let me give you a little pause, because I’m holding out. Councilor, let me just let me just give you a little pause. This is on the amendment to strike about the training. I think you’re back on the original motion more than anything.

[1:46:15] So I’ll give you. All right. Perfect. Thank you. Okay. So as a woman who has worked in Stem my whole adult life, um, these types of trainings are so vital. I have watched the workforce change over the good Lord. Um, 30 something years that I’ve been in Stem.

[1:46:43] I have watched the workforce change where I couldn’t get a job as a woman in Stem to where I wasn’t able to. I wouldn’t be allowed to do my job as a woman in Stem. To where now I’m just mostly ignored as a woman in Stem to where now I’m starting to get leader leadership positions as a woman in Stem.

[1:47:06] That’s just my experience. And I’m a white blonde chick, so if you’re gay, presenting, if you’re black, if you’re old, if you’re too young, if you’re any other color, these trainings are changing the world little by little by little. I will not support this amendment. Those trainings are important and they make a difference. I yield.

[1:47:33] The floor. Is there any debate and we kind of keep it to the training Councilor Kavey. Through the chair to either Director Taylor or the mayor? Um, what other mandatory trainings does the city of Pittsfield have? That’s okay. Did you hear the. Question I did, yes.

[1:47:56] From time to time we’ll mandate, um, you know, various topics that are, you know, a serious nature and compliance, like sexual harassment. Um, again, by law, it’s not necessarily mandatory. But again, depending on values, policy, whatever, we may very well mandate it ethics as well as another good example. Thank you. Mayor. Which some councilors have not taken. Okay. Thank you. For another day.

[1:48:18] We also have, uh, like mandatory cybersecurity. We have other mandatory trainings that we have to do. In during our discussion and ordinances and rules about this.

[1:48:37] We had asked, uh, Director Roberson, uh, like the modules that we all have to go through for, um, cyber security, which Kevin emails us about 100 times a day. Right. Um, you could do something similar to that. You could do something where it would be a module. They’d have to watch a video and go through a specific type of training, per the director’s request. And they could do it on their own time.

[1:48:52] So say you have a half an hour of downtime here, a half an hour there. Um, you’d be able to complete the trainings. Yeah. And even thus far, any of the trainings that have come out of HR or even out of director, uh, director Obasanjo’s department have not been very lengthy. They’re probably an hour or maybe 90 minutes at most.

[1:49:10] Um, we make them accessible for a lot of departments too, that have to, that are more public facing, meaning that we’ll offer them at multiple times, whether it’s twice a day, morning or afternoon, or throughout the month or whatever the case might be. So, um, we’re not being too disruptive to those offices or to people, um, to their work. So.

[1:49:28] All right. Thank you. I yield. On the amendment number two about training, just for we’re clear. Councilor Lampiasi. Thank you. Um, one of I would just like to speak about why I supported mandatory trainings. And that’s really because what we’re talking about here is a value system that the city of Pittsfield has as an employer.

[1:49:51] Um, we’ve kind of gotten off topic in terms of scrutinizing the functionality. And, um, productivity of the office, forgetting that there’s been a transition. And there is this this is a feel that is not really understood by a lot of people. It is it takes time to get that data to get going.

[1:50:13] And I think to Mayor Marchetti credit, he has found what I understand from my conversation with you privately in your office is a vision of what you want this office to be. And I think that that’s a beautiful thing for an elected official to figure out.

[1:50:31] I think it’s a heroic thing to come forward and talk about how you want to transform this office. And through our conversation, I started to really understand the more nuanced reasons for the proposal that you’ve brought forward.

[1:50:53] And I walked away from your office that day thinking of all the problems I had working in HR with employees who didn’t quite fit in for different reasons, or they had other employees, didn’t know why they had, you know, these different ways of doing things. And sometimes it’s about never having worked in an office before, never having worked in this type of environment before. There can be racial, there can be economic things. There can be all of these different factors that come together.

[1:51:11] And I walked away thinking, this is an office that’s going to notice that employee that’s struggling, that maybe this is the first person in their family who’s ever had an office job, and they’re from Morningside, or they’re from West Side, and we now have a team that can go in and help guide them through office culture and overcoming the

[1:51:32] things that are holding them back when it’s not their ability to do the work, it’s something else that’s coming up. You know, I also think that there’s an important element here of retention year after year in budgets. We talk about how we can’t keep employees, we can’t fill certain positions.

[1:51:49] When I’m out in the community, it’s really heartbreaking to hear people from predominantly years past long before me. But terrible employment stories about here in the city of Pittsfield or other offices, uh, in Berkshire County. Right. Like you don’t want to hear that.

[1:52:12] And when you’re talking to older folks that have experienced that type of discrimination that originated the Dei office, we have work to do. Um, Mr. Mayor, will you come up and kind of say what you feel appropriate based on the conversation that we had and what I’ve alluded to? Sure. I mean, for me.

[1:52:37] Not as the white cis man, um, had a different experience growing up in life. Um, like many of you that have also experienced that. But I look at myself as a first generation college student who made it. Um. I have, um, a sister. She’s made it.

[1:53:06] But in retail, and she is doing great at the job, but didn’t get the professional career. I have, um, six other cousins. None of them made it to college. And why is that? Well, I was a GE family. My mom stayed home to make sure that I was taken care of.

[1:53:28] My dad worked, so a lot of the opportunities that were afforded to some of my friends in school weren’t afforded to me. We always went on vacation. Salisbury Beach, pop a tent, pop a camper, but we didn’t get to go to Disney World. Um, as a kid growing up. And when I look at our community and I look at the work I did when I was the chair of Morningside initiative.

[1:53:52] When we look at our data, and if I had known you were going to ask this, I would have brought it. And I bring the 2020 census. I think the thing and this may get me in trouble. That is our biggest deficit is folks living in poverty. And what’s the key to getting out of poverty? It’s education.

[1:54:22] Look at the the the way that we’re transforming the school system this year to a fair student model by taking one of our schools that, you know, the learning environment is not conducive and putting them into other schools.

[1:54:44] Sure, we’re leaving one behind because CompTIA is still open with open classrooms, but there’s a plan for a brand new school on the West side that will address the issues. I wish it could be tomorrow. It’s not tomorrow. And so how are we going to raise people up from poverty? It’s education. It’s being there as a community.

[1:55:01] It’s looking at the fact that right now there should be no barrier for any person in Pittsfield other than possibly transportation, of getting someone up to Berkshire Community College for a free two year education and a degree, and from there, where are they going? Are they going to MCLa? Are they getting a job in Pittsfield? Um, that’s what

[1:55:22] I’m looking for here. And when you and I had a conversation, maybe I’m even confused because what I’m looking for, I don’t know, comes out of this piece of paper that’s before you. But it’s a start. And I don’t have to put in an ordinance.

[1:55:42] Every directive that I’m going to give to my director of equity or my next director of equity or a futures, mayor’s director of equity, I think that this can evolve in the position, can create policies to do exactly what I’m trying to say here.

[1:56:08] And in the meantime, we also know, as Councilor Moody pointed out, that not all of us can walk into a room and be treated with respect or be treated the way that some of the rest of us can be. And so I just think it’s important that I shared that with you. I share it with everyone. Um, that’s the direction that I want to see this department go. Thank you. Mayor.

[1:56:25] Um, I know that may have been a long winded way for us to demonstrate my point here. Uh, but all of that is to say, these trainings that I expect to take place will be concise, much more concise than this discussion tonight.

[1:56:44] And what happened to owner? Um, they will be in line with how the city has conducted trainings and other areas, and they will continue to perpetuate a culture of really what is systems change and employee retention and finding new ways of doing things and making sure our employees are happy and that they are serving all of our residents. I yield the floor.. Councilor Warren. Oh, sorry. Yeah.

[1:57:07] Councilor Warren point of, uh, point of a thing because, uh, it was not dealing with the amendment, but I yield. What it was. Yeah, she brought it back. She saved us. Councilor White. Yes.

[1:57:24] I want to thank Councilor Lampiasi and the mayor for, um, the direction that went, because I think that proves exactly why we need these trainings. We all have different backgrounds. We’ve all lived different experiences, and maybe it’s because I’ve taken these trainings for years as a state employee. There are times you need to be shown what other people go through.

[1:57:49] We can’t all walk in someone else’s shoes, but I don’t think that means we should ignore what their experience is and what their, um, backgrounds have led them to in the struggles they’ve gone through. I served on the affirmative Action committee until we couldn’t do quorum. We couldn’t get a quorum. Um, conversations with the last mayor, conversations with this mayor. It it takes training to stay on the the amendment.

[1:58:13] It takes training to have buy in from all employees, from all boards and commissions, from elected officials. Without that training, some of this could seem meaningless. You might not understand the the reasons why we’re fighting so hard for this tonight.

[1:58:36] Anyone struggling with it? You know, I suggest take a training on it and see what it’s like to have to struggle like others have struggled. What it looks like to have a percentage of people in our community not represented in jobs in our city. So I won’t be supporting this amendment, but I will be supporting the main motion.

[1:58:58] Is there any other debate on the amendment? Hearing or seeing none all those in favor, please? Signify in the usual manner. Hi everyone. And anyone opposed, opposed. That is 1 to 9. That fails Councilor Cunningham you still have the floor. All right.

[1:59:23] Well, I think Councilor Warren brought up prior that there’s a decent bit of compliance formatting questions that are to be raised. I don’t know if you plan to raise those at all. About numbers and number. Yeah, I had a list of them, but I. Yeah, numbers, signatures. I’m going to ask the clerk, which I think the clerk is going to address. Yeah. Through the chair of the.

[1:59:41] Clerk numbers will be assigned by general code if we submit them like this, they will make them conform to what we currently have in the code, which we did when we did the re codification. So we could send these with no numbers, no letters. No. And they will take care of that.

[2:00:05] Okay. And then I think there’s a decent bit of spelling or grammar. They will take care of that. Okay. All right. So long as it doesn’t change the structure. But I feel like that makes sense. Um. Oh yield the floor. Then on the main motion.. Point of order this there’s four provisions.

[2:00:30] Can we split them? Uh, where are you? Yeah, this is a motion to ordain. Yeah. So the top four before it starts. There’s. Give me a page, sir. Yeah. So what I have page. What you’re looking at. Yeah. Uh, one on five at the top. Four provisions for, um, ordained men’s 105. I’m getting. There at the top.

[2:00:54] And I’m adding one. Adding? Yeah. Under the. Oh, yeah. But how does. You can separate them? And you probably should. But the motion was to ordain. So I want to clarify what the motions are going to be. If we do separate them. Are they all are they all motions to ordain. Yeah. Well.

[2:01:16] Because you can only ordain an ordinance through another ordinance. So it’d be an ordinance to repeal according to the charter. I just. Want we could ask for turning grand champ. Yep. 20 grand champ. Do you.? I didn’t see any arrears. The word arrears towards the end, I know is, uh. There’s some others. But it’s missing. And, ah.

[2:01:38] Page 105. There’s amending the code, and then there’s four sections. At the very top. At the very top. Three to delete and the one to amend. So the three to delete if we take them separately, what should be the motion.

[2:02:03] You should do each one of the separate motion to delete it in its entirety. But before you do that, you should understand that the revised or the new ordinance, you see, is a combination of those that are being deleted. So if you don’t delete that, any one of those but accept the entire ordinance, it’s going to be a bit of a confusing mess.

[2:02:25] It was a challenge for, um, the departments to to distill those down into one comprehensive ordinance. So if you take them separately and you don’t delete one, but you pass the overall ordinance, you’re going to have a problem. So I would consider taking it as a single motion to accept the leading amendment and adding the new ordinance.

[2:02:48] That would be my recommendation to you, but it’s your prerogative if you choose to take each individual one of those separately, you can do that. Whose decision is that to make? Uh, I would say that that is whoever makes the motions decision. And so his motion is to take him separately.

[2:03:06] Someone could approve. You could approve that motion or not. It’s a real 21. I don’t. Have the rule 20 can pull up rule 21. I, I would. Councilor Warren I would love to hear a suggestion. I would suggest ultimately it’s not going to matter. I agreed. Uh, so just do them separately.

[2:03:28] I don’t think it’s going to matter, but I do want to speak on number four. Uh uh, section 30. When we get there. And technically be. Split. So you have to split. All right. I no, no. I’m fine. So we’re going to take them separately.

[2:03:50] We’re going to take them separately. So back to my the deletions, our motions to approve. And the last one is motion to ordain attorney Grand champ. That’s correct. Thank you. So we’re going to take them separately on the first one. Uh can you have that up, madam clerk? I have no idea. Where you just read that first.

[2:04:10] That right there. Right? That’s right. Yep, yep. The code of the City of Pittsfield. Chapter two article, I don’t know, be deleted in its entirety. Councilor White motion to. Approve a motion to approve because it’s the deletion. Yes. This is for the deletion. So the motion to approve is to delete the section. XliX. 4949.

[2:04:35] All those in favor, please Signify in the usual manner I anyone opposed? Opposed. That section is 9 to 1 with Councilor Cunningham in opposition. The next section, please. Madam clerk. The city of Pittsfield. Chapter two, article 52. Thank you. Be deleted in its entirety. Councilor White motion to.

[2:05:02] Approve on the motion to approve all those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. Aye. Anyone opposed? That’s unanimous. The next section, madam clerk. Of the City of Pittsfield. Chapter. 2727. Delete in its entirety. Councilor White motion to approve. Is there any debate or discussion? Hearing none. Seeing none. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner I opposed. It’s going to be roll calls.

[2:05:28] That’s unanimous. Madam Clerk. Because there ordinances. Hold on. We’re on. The fourth one is the ordain. We just did the three. Those are. So we’re moving on to the fourth one, which is a motion to ordain for the city solicitor. The code of the city of Pittsfield. Chapter two, section 30, be amended as follows.

[2:05:49] On the motion Councilor White sorry.. Motion to ordain. On the motion to ordain. Is there any debate or discussion? I’ll let him go for it. Councilor Cunningham. Point of order. Charter objection. Are you serious? You can’t charge. It is my first time. It’s the first time the questions pull it.

[2:06:11] No, it came here first concert or city solicitor. You’re up again, sir. He’s right. Yes. Okay, so there was a charter. Objection. There’s questions raised. If this was brought to us. This is the first time or the second time? This is the second time it was brought to this and it was referred to owner in. Oh, and.

[2:06:45] What was the question? Put. I’m sorry. I’m, I’m, I’m not sure what the question is. Clarifying. Sure. On adoption. So a. Charter objection is the first time it comes before the council to be voted on, which would be tonight. So by doing this, I guess the question is, does the department then not exist due. To. Exactly correct.

[2:07:12] All right then, um. Motion to reconsider. Three hasty motions. Yep. Because we deleted them and then he tried to reject them. So we’re gonna on the motion to reconsider. Which is the Di one. That’s the only one that matters. That was the first one. Um, correct. It’d be safer to leave them all. We gotta put them all.

[2:07:39] They all matter. Um, most. Of them. Are from Councilor White’s motion to reconsider. All three of them. So it’s. Is there. That’s our vote. Motion to, um, reconsider. Reconsider the three sections we just deleted. 49, 50 and 27. Correct. Okay, I guess can I have some clarification? I so we took these out of order.

[2:08:09] We deleted three sections on the fourth section. That was charter objected. But don’t don’t we need two votes. Two additional votes for Charter objection now. No, I don’t believe so. I never got through the state. You just get to say it. And it ends everything. It’s still at the state. Yeah. We haven’t got it back.

[2:08:32] So so so the third section is charter objected. Right. Fourth. Fourth section. Excuse me. Now because of that it creates a problem logistically with the department in general. I think that was the goal from the beginning. Um, so Councillor White has made a motion to reconsider all three.

[2:08:59] The side, that one, it gets to. He was on that side of it. So we have to re vote to reconsider it. Is there any other clarification you need, counselor? Well thank you. We can bring the city solicitor back up if need be. And just to be clear, I made that motion to reconsider, to restore what we had.

[2:09:20] Correct. Is there anything else that. The only thing I have a question on is I thought the new updated charter had that if you did a charter objection, you had to have somebody. No additional vote. Not yet has. Passed yet. Okay. That’s what I’m okay. Okay. Thank you. All right.

[2:09:45] Is there any points of clarification on the reconsideration point of clarification? Go. Well. I would like a point of clarification in terms of the benefit for waiting two weeks to vote on this. Again, like what is the. Well, I mean, well, we we hold on. So four is already charter objected. It’s not going to change okay okay.

[2:10:08] So let’s not even waste any more time. Let us go back to the reconsideration to put the department back the way it was until we deal with it next week or two weeks from now. All those in favor to reconsider, please.

[2:10:31] Signify in the usual manner I anyone opposed? Opposed that reconsideration is 9 to 1 with Councilor Cunningham in opposition. Point of clarification for me. City solicitor. Are we all set now with this? There was no debate. Yeah, we. Always do the vote to reinstate. Sorry. Reinstate because. You did. That’s why I called them back up. I knew I was missing something perfect. Just you do each individually since they were deleted.

[2:10:53] Perfect on the vote to consider number one to reinstate. Motion to reinstate article 49. On the motion to reinstate article 49. Is there any debate or discussion? Councilor Cunningham under our rules? Rule 34 I believe or ordinance and rules are supposed to review this and ensure it’s form and then pass it to attorney Grand Champ for

[2:11:20] his signature approval and form. And I see no signature anywhere on these documents. That is when it’s ordained. Are you talking right here? It hasn’t been ordained. We’re back to reinstating. To the rules. It’s before it returns to the council. Further, the point for wasn’t even an article.

[2:11:39] It was a section. And so it’s not even named correctly. If that’s something resolved later. Sure. But this is this is rife with a number of issues. I don’t think it should have gone through anyway. Um. You created the issues. Counselor, because I figure we’re going to reconsider all three of these. The only one I’ll be supporting is Excel.

[2:11:55] I think 49. You said it was. Thanks for this. Is there any other debate or discussion on the motion to reinstate, uh, article? Was it 49? Yes. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner I anyone opposed? Uh, ten? Yes. Yes. Uh, on the motion to reinstate 5252, councillor. Uh, white.

[2:12:21] Motion to reinstate chapter two, article 50. On the motion to reinstate 52, chapter 250. Article 52. All any debate or discussion Councilor Cunningham. Through the chair to attorney. Grand champ.

[2:12:45] When it comes to the ambassador compensations, how do we plan that to impact our collective bargaining negotiations or any of those agreements? Is my understanding. After talking to Mr. Taylor and Labor Council, that that is acceptable under the current collective bargaining agreement. Discretionary payments. That the $200 payments for those services are acceptable under the collective bargaining agreements. And I’ve also checked in their acceptable under the ethics rules. Okay. Roger, I had some questions.

[2:13:10] More about those that ambassador position, but I won’t drag us longer. I yield the floor. So I repeat discussion. Hearing none are seeing none. All those in favor to reinstate, please Signify in the usual manner I anyone opposed? Opposed? That’s 9 to 1 Councilor Cunningham in opposition. Uh, and the last one to reinstate. code chapter two article.

[2:13:35] What’s that? 2727 Councilor Warren. Where are you at? Needed. You. Councilor white. Motion to reinstate. On the motion to reinstate. Is there any debate or discussion? Hearing. None are seeing none. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner I anyone opposed? Opposed? Councilor Cunningham in opposition. Uh, item number 13.

[2:14:07] I have no idea where my agenda is. A report from the Pittsfield Economic Development Authority on a petition from Councilor Warren requesting a status update on all undeveloped parcels. Councilor Warren. Uh, um, I move that we accept the communication and the presentation. Mr. Coakley. I get this up here. Councilors.

[2:15:12] I’m Michael Coakley, the business development manager for the city of Pittsfield. I’m also the interim executive director of the Peter, the Economic development Authority. Uh Councilor Warren asked me to come in and give an update of what’s happened over at the William Stanley Business Park, and I’m happy to do that.

[2:15:30] Start off with the what’s happening at the BIC. Most of you, uh, were involved here back in November when the Bic and Marius optics came in front of us. Mass tech TAC cups program awarded the BIC $7.2 million for an advanced optics tech hub at the BIC.

[2:15:52] Um, the BIC is going to construct an 8000 square foot addition to build the tech hub. Mirrors. Optics and EMA will be the anchor companies of this. Mirrors optics plans to create 55 jobs with average salaries of $110,000. And in November, the city council approved $500,000 for the BIC and $500,000 for Mary’s Optics, uh, from the Economic Development Fund.

[2:16:22] The illustration you see, the 8000 square foot addition is on the right hand side of the building. The eastern portion of the building, the BIC, has been preparing the plans for this. They are working with the mass DEP to get set. They are hoping to start construction, um, by the end of this year.

[2:16:41] The other big thing happening at the park is the redevelopment project at site nine. If you look at this photo, you see what the condition of slate nine used to be. It was 16.5 acres. It was completely covered in concrete foundations and pavements. It was it was basically, for all intents and purposes, on developable.

[2:16:57] I would take a possible developer out to walk on that site. And when you get out there, when you look at this picture, you even drive by. You can’t tell how big that is. That’s 16.5 acres, but it was completely covered in the concrete and it was undeveloped.

[2:17:16] So we came up with a plan with a slight readiness grant for mass development. We hired a couple of firms to develop a plan to to make site nine development ready. We came up with a plan. We raised $10.8 million with grant funding, put the project out to to bid. We hired Keller Construction and Maximilian. You see here back during the project.

[2:17:39] Maximilian is out there. They’re cracking and crushing the concrete. We trucked in over 100,000yd of clean fill. We constructed roads, utility corridors, stormwater management and greening the site. And here’s another picture of the construction. This picture. Here is an illustration of what the fully developed site could be.

[2:18:06] Up in the northern section along Tyler Street, there’s kind of kind of a commercial type of buildings. And then the middle and lower section would be for R&D, advanced manufacturing. That type of things would be bringing in some high quality jobs for the site.

[2:18:26] If you look at this picture now, you see that the kind of red building over on the right hand side that has been demolished since then. And if you look at the and the left hand middle side, the old Peta building or the old, uh, Railroad Credit Union, that building has been demolished as well.

[2:18:47] This illustration here gives you kind of an idea of what the potential parcels could be. Milltown capital has purchased parcels one and two, the green and the kind of pink at the top along along Tyler Street. And they also purchased three acres along Woodlawn Avenue. Mill town plans to build a residential development on Woodland Avenue and a commercial development at site nine.

[2:19:18] That blue area in the middle, parcel number four, Peter, has received an offer for four acres from a pharmaceutical R&D company. This company plans to build a 10,000 square foot contract laboratory, create up to 30 jobs during the first two years. Peter is in the middle of negotiating a purchase and sale agreement with them.

[2:19:41] Now they are a startup company, so Peter has put in a couple of conditions before we’ll sell the property. One is they have to show Peter that they have raised enough money to purchase the property, construct a building and have a couple of years operating funds.

[2:19:59] They’re currently raising the funding and we’re hoping things work out here soon. We’ll find out fairly soon how things are going with their fundraising. And the bottom and the pink area. Parcel number five, the mass Executive Office of Economic Development, uh, made an introduction to a company. It’s a spin out from MIT.

[2:20:26] Um, they make they’ve come up with with a manufacturer, of radiation, photonic smart coatings for use in space solar panels. This is coatings that go on the solar panels that go on satellites. And they’re, uh, technology doubles the lifespan of satellites in space. We’ve had the CEO and the executive team come out to Pittsfield. We met them at the BIC. We walked over to the property.

[2:20:45] They really liked the property. They liked the BIC. We introduced them to EMA and EMA and they will be working together. You may be doing some testing on the products that go to space.

[2:21:06] We have a meeting coming up soon with the Economic Executive Office of Economic Development and this company to see how a state can help and how we can get things going here. Again, this company is going to need to raise a lot of money to do this. But but they’re pretty excited about the business park. This year is a it’s a site map of the park.

[2:21:21] So you can show you say the the different sites. You can see site nine up in the right hand side site. For right now it’s just south across the the railroad tracks from site nine. It’s 1.3 acres. We have a local company that’s exploring constructing an office building on that property.

[2:21:41] They are outside of Pittsfield. They want to come to Pittsfield. Um, they have looked for buildings around the Pittsfield area, but they haven’t found anything they wanted that they liked. So they’re looking to construct a building at site for they like the location.

[2:21:59] They like the fact that it’s across from the BIC. They are working right now with a local engineer and architectural firm for a feasibility study. Um, they’re helping to decide what size building they want or need and what the cost will be. Now, construction costs have skyrocketed over the last couple of years.

[2:22:20] We’ve had a couple of other companies that look to build there and then backed out when they got their cost estimates, so we’ll see what happens here. Just below site four is the big parking lot across from the BIC, which is about three acres. Um, you may have noticed there is a an office trailer on the eastern portion of that. You notice some, uh, orange traffic cones.

[2:22:41] MassDOT has leased that property for CDL testing, commercial driver’s license, testing. You drive by, sometimes you see buses or trucks backing up around the cones. They have just re-upped for another year for that site. I think it’s a very good usage of that of that site. Sites seven and eight run along Kellogg Street.

[2:23:05] Unfortunately, if you look at site seven eight, the condition is exactly what site nine was before we did the project. It’s completely covered in concrete foundations and pavements, so it has been on developable site eight. If some of you remember, there used to be a five story building there. So, so, um, we’ll we’ll see what happens.

[2:23:26] I’ll talk about that in a second. You’ll see some action at site seven recently. There’s some storage containers. You’ll see trucks going in and out. Utility Partners of America. There are utility, uh, contractor. They are doing a major, uh, smart meter conversion project in the Pittsfield area.

[2:23:47] So they are leasing site seven for the next six months, and then we’ll see how the project goes. And they will go month and month from that point on. Um, we did receive a say readiness grant from mass development for $500,000.

[2:24:04] We’re really looking to kind of do something similar to what we did at site nine, and to find out what the condition is of that site, and then we can see how you know what it’s going to take to build on that site.

[2:24:24] Um, the $500,000 pays for site investigation, characterization, survey, conceptual planning, pre permitting, engineering, designing, estimating and really will give us a plan of what we can do with those two sites. If you look at site eight it’s a huge it’s it’s almost three acres of an old, uh, foundation. It would be very helpful if we find out that we can build on top of that. Otherwise it’s going to be very expensive to crack and crush that get the get the concrete out there and rebuild.

[2:24:43] So we’re hoping that we can find a way to build on top of it. Use the current foundation somehow in order to put a building on top there. And as I mentioned, there used to be a five story building on there, so it’s a pretty strong foundation. So we’ll see what happens. Um. Oops.

[2:25:03] That’s what’s happening at the site. Uh, any questions? I’d be more than happy to ask. Councilor Warren. Um, yes. Uh uh, when members of the city council would like to invoke their oversight or input responsibilities, probably one of the most substantial is our, uh, involvement in economic development.

[2:25:31] Uh, and here, regarding the Pita, um, the state thought it was necessary enough or important enough that they required as part of the special legislation that the city council, along with the mayor, get the annual reports.

[2:25:53] Um, they’re supposed to be sent to us and we’ve gotten some periodic updates as a result of my petitions, because I think this is probably one of the most important development areas, economic development in our city. Um, a couple of questions I have through the chair, uh, regarding to the two parcels that, um, Mill Town purchased, it was 4.7 acres. Correct. I’ve been asked by numerous constituents.

[2:26:15] I don’t know if my colleagues, I haven’t really discussed it with them, but some of my constituents are wondering how is the amount to sell those properties, determine? We see, and I understand this isn’t, uh, an exact metric, but we when you’re talking about all these, uh, parcels and fixing them up

[2:26:37] to develop, we spent 10 million of a state grant. We put money into that. I mean, that’s probably gold. That property is probably like gold. And I know, I know, we sold two parcels for like, $147,000, I think, or somewhere in there. How did how was that number derived? It was $200,000 for the two parcels.

[2:27:01] Okay, okay. 100 per preacher. No, it was a, uh. Well, first let me go back aways when Peter first, uh, applied for funding through the state, I think it was in 2023. We did not receive that funding and we talked to the two mass works after that.

[2:27:20] And they said the reason why he didn’t get the funding is because you don’t have a committed developer. And they said, if you find a committed developer, then we can talk next year and give award you the funding.

[2:27:36] So we came back and we started talking with Milltown and we partnered with them. They partnered with us and they said they would commit to purchasing that property. They gave us. They gave us an offer. Um. The Pita board accepted it, and then we went to the state and we applied for that funding, and we got the funding.

[2:27:55] So we never would have gotten the funding without having Milltown in there as the first committed developer. So they they made us an offer. The Pita board accepted it. And then then and then once we finalized the the redevelopment project, then Pita just purchased it basically was in June of this past year.

[2:28:19] Right. But is there any thought process of where the 200 came from? I mean, I know they offered it, but is it did did we go to our assessors to sort of get an idea? We work with a professional commercial real estate company.

[2:28:40] Um, they based they based their offer on an appraisal that they did, um, they showed that to us. They gave us the offer. The Pita board voted to accept it. We wouldn’t have gotten any of this done without partnering up with Milltown Capital. So at some point somebody would have, uh, come to that, to that parcel. But, um, but anyways. I wanted to say.

[2:28:58] That. Okay, uh, but you did get a chance to look at the appraisal. You did. Okay. So there so I can feel comfortable telling my constituents that there was some logical thing, um, uh, down the road, um, I see in some of the diagram, there are rights of way that are inside site nine.

[2:29:19] Uh, are is what is Pita looking? Are you eventually going to come to the city? Do you. Have I think we’re. Working on that now to accept the two roads of the northern Road in the in the southern road there, we’ll be coming to City Council probably in the next month or so to to bring

[2:29:35] that to City Council, to accept those roads. Okay. Um, and you and I have had some discussion on some possible names that pita has thought. Of is. Already voted to name a couple, the name all three of those roads. Well. Uh, when they’re accepted, the city gets to name them.

[2:29:56] And I’m just going to tell you, obviously, my colleagues overrule me if they do. Uh, some of the names I would suggest are using vernacular. Extremely lame. Um, I think when I want to see a road named especially a big project like this, I’m looking for achievement or significance.

[2:30:22] Calling a road innovation drive or whatever place, uh, just doesn’t cut it. Hopefully my colleagues in a month can come up with more creative things I’ve suggested something after the astronaut that came from City of Pittsfield. I actually wanted to change the lower half of Woodlawn, but I’ll take one of those.

[2:30:42] But we need to do something to commemorate and motivate people, rather than some of these lame names. I’m sorry. And but the city gets the name, the names when we accept it. Uh, somebody can come to us with some idea of Warren Drive, and you guys tell me when I give it to you that, uh, you think that’s not what should be.

[2:31:03] So I’m just letting you know. Okay? When we bring that to you, we can discuss that. Um, and then last but not least, I mean, it looks like there’s some give and take back here. I frankly want to commend you, uh, as business manager. And, Peter, you’ve done a hell of a job.

[2:31:20] Uh, you’re doing very well in developing that. We’re getting a lot of projects there. We have the potential for more projects, and I don’t want to make it sound like I have any problems.

[2:31:36] Uh, I just wanted to point out I had questions from constituents, and I frankly think we should do a better job on the other thing. But you guys have been doing a great job. Oh, and I have one other question that, uh, for seven and eight, you said that 500 000 grant. We haven’t been given that yet. Right now. We haven’t been given that we get that reimbursed when we spend the money. We sent it in for reimbursement, and then we.

[2:31:51] So we are I mean, we get used to that, but we’ve got to spend it. I just wondering if it’s something down the road or if we already have it where we can eventually use. It. Will we? We receive the grant.

[2:32:08] It’s for the it’s for the site readiness for site seven and eight. Okay. Uh, we have a contract with Mass Development on that. There are certain things that that they will reimburse and other things that they wouldn’t. Okay. So that’s. All. I want. I yield the floor. Thank you. Is there any other debate or discussion? Hearing none.

[2:32:27] Our seeing none on the motion to accept the communication and place on file. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. Aye. Anyone opposed? That’s unanimous. Is there anything under rule 27? Councilor Cunningham. Item number 14. Item number 14. Madam clerk. A petition from Councilor Cunningham casting the mayor.

[2:32:57] Submit and publish a department surveillance report covering all surveillance technology currently in use, and requesting the city solicitor to advise the compliance to date with governing surveillance technology. Councilor Cunningham. So the. Why I’m bringing this up right now and why I can’t just refer it is um, in chapter 18.5 to actually get the surveillance report to the council.

[2:33:19] Um, it can’t just be requested by one councillor. It has to be requested by the city council. So we would need a vote. According to the city solicitor, this was being this was able to be referred under rule 27. I had checked on that before. I referred it. Upon request by the City Council. I don’t want to.

[2:33:35] I don’t speak for the city Council, so I figured we vote on it. So then we know we’re in compliance. With it. So I yield the floor. Yep. Anything under rule 27, we vote in the affirmative by not objecting to. That’s on the city’s list. That’s what city solicitor informed me of. That’s why we put under rule 27.

[2:33:56] If it’s referred to, I assume, outside of a. US refer, anybody not bringing it up and changing what I did is us saying, yes, we agree to that. It accept things going through subcommittee, I presume. What’s that? Because it can’t. You can’t approve of it going to a sub approving of the referral.

[2:34:16] Yes. Yes. Okay. I’m saying we need to approve of the motion to activate the code. If, I mean, if the solicitor says it’ll still work, then it’ll still. Work in the city solicitor. That that was an appropriate motion to refer. As long as we get the report.

[2:34:29] Yep. I don’t think I think the mayor would not hold us not getting the report. All right, because we didn’t do it that way. All right. Yield the floor. We can we can motion to refer it. I guess. Councilor Warren. Yes. Uh, just one quick thing, because I think we were erroneously or possible erroneous.

[2:34:48] Uh, impression or whatever. There’s many departments that this, uh, ordinance applies to. Somehow people think it only applies to the police. So when we say that the police violated this ordinance and didn’t follow through, and they should be have their hands whacked, it’s all the departments. And I don’t think anybody should be criticized.

[2:35:10] There was reasons why this fell through the cracks. I think I know why it did, but rather than blame people, we need to move forward. So I want to get us the reports. But it’s not just the police. So the public should know. It’s not just the police that didn’t follow through.

[2:35:24] To hammer. Just make there, make the motion to refer to the mayor and city solicitor to make sure we clean it up. Clean this up. That’d be great. Move the move to refer as per the council president’s original thoughts. On that motion. All. All in favor, please.

[2:35:42] Signify in the usual manner I anyone opposed? That’s unanimous. Anything else under rule 27? Councilor White motion to adjourn. On the motion to adjourn. All those in favor, please. Signify in the usual manner. Aye. Anyone opposed? That’s unanimous. Have a good night,

Pittsfield City Council Meeting - September 22, 2026

Transcript